made up from the territory of Ariobarzanes (which whom Antalcidas kept up a friendship of long standing), in the absence of Pharnabazus, who by this date had already been summoned up country on the occasion of his marriage with the king's daughter. With this fleet, which, from whatever sources derived, amounted to more than eighty sail, Antalcidas ruled the seas, and was in a position not only to cut off the passage of vessels bound to Athens from the Euxine, but to convoy them into the harbours of Sparta's allies.
The Athenians could not but watch with alarm the growth of the enemy's fleet, and began to fear a repetition of their former discomfiture. To be trampled under foot by the hostile power seemed indeed no remote possibility, now that the Lacedaemonians had procured an ally in the person of the Persian monarch, and they were in little less than a state of siege themselves, pestered as they were by privateers from Aegina. On all these grounds the Athenians became passionately desirous of peace.[16] The Lacedaemonians were equally out of humour with the war for various reasons--what with their garrison duties, one mora at Lechaeum and another at Orchomenus, and the necessity of keeping watch and ward on the states, if loyal not to lose them, if disaffected to prevent their revolt; not to mention that reciprocity of annoyance[17] of which Corinth was the centre. So again the Argives had a strong appetite for peace; they knew that the ban had been called out against them, and, it was plain, that no fictitious alteration of the calendar would any longer stand them in good stead. Hence, when Tiribazus issued a summons calling on all who were willing to listen to the terms of peace sent down by the king[18] to present themselves, the invitation was promptly accepted. At the opening of the conclave[19] Tiribazus pointed to the king's seal attached to the document, and proceeded to read the contents, which ran as follows:
[16] See, at this point, Grote on the financial condition of Athens and the 'Theorikon,' 'H. G.' ix. 525.
[17] Or, 'that give-and-take of hard knocks.'
[18] See Hicks, 76.
[19] At Sardis, doubtless.
'The king, Artaxerxes, deems it just that the cities in Asia, with the islands of Clazomenae and Cyprus, should belong to himself; the rest of the Hellenic cities he thinks it just to leave independent, both small and great, with the exception of Lemnos, Imbros, and Scyros, which three are to belong to Athens as of yore. Should any of the parties concerned not accept this peace, I, Artaxerxes, will war against him or them with those who share my views. This will I do by land and by sea, with ships and with money.'
After listening to the above declaration the ambassadors from the several states proceeded to report the same to their respective governments. One and all of these took the oaths[20] to ratify and confirm the terms unreservedly, with the exception of the Thebans, who claimed to take the oaths in behalf of all Boeotians. This claim Agesilaus repudiated: unless they chose to take the oaths in precise conformity with the words of the king's edict, which insisted on 'the future autonomy of each state, small or great,' he would not admit them. To this the Theban ambassadors made no other reply, except that the instructions they had received were different. 'Pray go, then,' Agesilaus retorted, 'and ask the question; and you may inform your countrymen that if they will not comply, they will be excluded from the treaty.' The Theban ambassadors departed, but Agesilaus, out of hatred to the Thebans, took active measures at once. Having got the consent of the ephors he forthwith offered sacrifice. The offerings for crossing the frontier were propitious, and he pushed on to Tegea. From Tegea he despatched some of the knights right and left to vist the perioeci and hasten their mobilisation, and at the same time sent commanders of foreign brigades to the allied cities on a similar errand. But before he had started from Tegea the answer from Thebes arrived; the point was yielded, they would suffer the states to be independent. Under these circumstances the Lacedaemonians returned home, and the Thebans were forced to accept the truce unconditionally, and to recognise the autonomy of the Boeotian cities.[21] But now the Corinthians were by no means disposed to part with the garrison of the Argives. Accordingly Agesilaus had a word of warning for both. To the former he said, 'if they did not forthwith dismiss the Argives,' and to the latter, 'if they did not instantly quit Corinth,' he would march an army into their territories. The terror of both was so great that the Argives marched out of Corinth, and Corinth was once again left to herself;[22] whereupon the 'butchers'[23] and their accomplices in the deed of blood determined to retire from Corinth, and the rest of the citizens welcomed back their late exiles voluntarily.
[20] At Sparta, doubtless.
[21] See Freeman, op. cit. pp. 168, 169.
[22] See 'Ages.' ii. 21; Grote, 'H. G.' ix. 537.
[23] {oi sphageis}, a party catchword (in reference to the incidents narrated above, 'Hell.' IV. iv. 2). See below, {ton bareon demagogon}, 'Hell.' V. ii. 7; {oi kedomenoi tes Peloponnesou}, 'Hell.' VII. v. 1; above, {oi sphageis}, 'Hell.' III. ii. 27, of the philo-Laconian oligarchs in Elis. See Dem. 'c. Lept.' 473.
Now that the transactions were complete, and the states were bound by their oaths to abide by the peace sent down to them by the king, the immediate result was a general disarmament, military and naval forces being alike disbanded; and so it was that the Lacedaemonians and Athenians, with their allies, found themselves in the enjoyment of peace for the first time since the period of hostilities subsequent to the demolition of the walls of Athens. From a condition which, during the war, can only be described as a sort of even balance with their antagonists, the Lacedaemonians now emerged; and reached a pinnacle of glory consequent upon the Peace of Antalcidas,[24] so called. As guarantors of the peace presented by Hellas to the king, and as administrators personally of the autonomy of the states, they had added Corinth to their alliance; they had obtained the independence of the states of Boeotia at the expense of Thebes,[25] which meant the gratification of an old ambition; and lastly, by calling out the ban in case the Argives refused to evacuate Corinth, they had put a stop to the appopriation of that city by the Argives.
[24] Or, more correctly, the peace 'under,' or 'at the date of,' {ep 'Antalkidou}. See Grote, 'H. G.' x. 1, note 1.
[25] Or, 'they had made the states of Boeotia independent of Thebes.' See Grote, 'H. G.' x. 44.
II
B.C. 386. Indeed the late events had so entirely shaped themselves in conformity with the wishes of the Lacedaemonians, that they determined to go a step farther and chastise those of their allies who either had borne hard on them during the war, or otherwise had shown themselves less favourable to Lacedaemon than to her enemies.[1] Chastisement was not all; they must lay down such secure foundations for the future as should render the like disloyalty impossible again.[2] As the first step towards this policy they sent a dictatorial message to the Mantinaeans, and bade them raze their fortifications, on the sole ground that they could not otherwise trust them not to side with their enemies. Many things in their conduct, they alleged, from time to time, had not escaped their notice: their frequent despatches of corn to the Argives while at war with Lacedaemon; at other times their refusal to furnish contingents during a campaign, on the pretext of some holy truce or other;[3] or if they did reluctantly take the field --the miserable inefficiency of their service. 'But, more than that,' they added, 'we note the jealousy with which you eye any good fortune which may betide our state; the extravagant pleasure[4] you exhibit at the sudden descent of some disaster.'
[1] See Hartman, 'An. Xen.' p. 367 foll.; Busolt, 'Die Lak.' p. 129 foll.
[2] Or, 'they determined to chastise . . . and reduce to such order that disloyalty should be impossible.'
[3] See above, 'Hell.' IV. ii. 16.
[4] Ib. IV. v. 18.
This very year, moreover, it was commonly said,[5] saw the expiration, as far as the Mantineans were concerned, of the thirty years' truce, consequent upon the battle of Mantinea. On their refusal, therefore, to raze their fortification walls the ban was called out against them. Agesilaus begged the state to absolve him from the conduct of this war on the plea that the city of Mantinea had done frequent service to his father[6] in his Messenian wars. Accordingly Agesipolis led the expedition--in spite of the cordial relations of his father Pausanias[7] with the leaders of the popular party in Mantinea.
[5] As to this point, see Curtius, 'H. G.' V. v. (iv. 305 note, Eng. trans.) There appears to be some confusion. According to Thuc. v. 81, 'When the Argives deserted the alliance [with Mantinea, Athens, and Elis, making a new treaty of alliance with Lacedaemon for fifty years] the Mantineans held out for a time, but without the Argives they were helpless, and so they came to terms with the Lacedaemonians, and gave up their claims to supremacy over the cities in Arcadia, which had been subject to them. . . . These changes were effected at the close of winter [418 B.C.] towards the approach of spring [417 B.C.], and so ended the fourteenth year of the war.' Jowett. According to Diod. xv. 5, the Lacedaemonians attacked Mantinea within two years after the Peace of Antalcidas, apparently in 386 B.C. According to Thuc. v. 82, and 'C. I. A.' 50, in B.C. 417 Argos had reverted to her alliance with Athens, and an attempt to connect the city with the sea by long walls was made,' certain other states in Peloponnese being
