Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography Volume I Part 1.djvu/91

 though it preserved its liberty for but a very short period before it fell under the yoke of Phalaris (about 570 B.C.). The history of that despot is involved in so much uncertainty that it is difficult to know what part of it can be depended on as really historical. [''Dict. of Biogr.'' art. , vol. iii.] But it seems certain that he raised Agrigentum to be one of the most powerful cities in Sicily, and extended his dominion by force of arms over a considerable part of the island. But the cruel and tyrranical character of his internal government at length provoked a general insurrection, in which Phalaris himself perished, and the Agrigentines recovered their liberty. (Diod. Exc. Vat. p. 25; Cic. de Off. ii. 7; Heraclides, Polit. 37.) From this period till the accession of Theron, an interval of about 60 years, we have no information concerning Agrigentum, except a casual notice that it was successively governed by Alcamenes and Alcandrus (but whether as despots or chief magistrates does not appear), and that it rose to great wealth and prosperity under their rule. (Heraclid. l. c.) The precise date when Theron attained to the sovereignty of his native city, as well as the steps by which he rose to power, are unknown to us: but he appears to have become despot of Agrigentum as early as B.C. 488. (Diod. xi. 53.) By his alliance with Gelon of Syracuse, and still more by the expulsion of Terillus from Himera, and the annexation of that city to his dominion, Theron extended as well as confirmed his power, and the great Carthaginian invasion in B.C. 480, which for a time threatened destruction to all the Greek cities in Sicily, ultimately became a source of increased prosperity to Agrigentum. For after the great victory of Gelon and Theron at Himera, a vast number of Carthaginian prisoners fell into the hands of the Agrigentines, and were employed by them partly in the cultivation of their extensive and fertile territory, partly in the construction of public works in the city itself, the magnificence of which was long afterwards a subject of admiration (Diod. xi. 25.) Nor does the government of Theron appear to have been oppressive, and he continued in the undisturbed possession of the sovereign power till his death, B.C. 472. His son Thrasydaeus on the contrary quickly alienated his subjects by his violent and arbitrary conduct, and was expelled from Agrigentum within a year after his father's death. (Id. xi. 53. For further details concerning the history of Agrigentum during this period, see the articles and  in the Dict. of Biogr. vol. iii.) The Agrigentines now established a democratic form of government, which they retained without interruption for the space of above 60 years, until the Carthaginian invasion in B.C. 406 — a period which may be regarded as the most prosperous and flourishing in the history of Agrigentum, as well as of many others of the Sicilian cities. The great public works which were commenced or completed during this interval were the wonder of succeeding ages; the city itself was adorned with buildings both public and private, inferior to none in Greece, and the wealth and magnificence of its inhabitants became almost proverbial. Their own citizen Empedocles is said to have remarked that they built their houses as if they were to live for ever, but gave themselves up to luxury as if they were to die on the morrow. (Diog. Laert. viii. 2. § 63.)

The number of citizens of Agrigentum at this time is stated by Diodorus at 20,000: but he estimates the whole population (including probably slaves as well as strangers) at not less than 200,000 (Diod. xiii. 84 and 90), a statement by no means improbable, while that of Diogenes Laertius (l. c.), who makes the population of the city alone amount to 800,000, is certainly a gross exaggeration.

This period was however by no means one of unbroken peace. Agrigentum could not avoid participating — though in a less degree than many other cities — in the troubles consequent on the expulsion of the Gelonian dynasty fiKnn Syracuse, and the revolutions that followed in different parts of Sicily. Shortly afterwards we find it engaged in hostilities with the Sicel chief Ducetius, and the conduct of the Syracusans towards that chieftain led to a war between them and the Agrigentines, which ended in a great defeat of the latter at the river Himera, B.C. 446. (Diod. xi. 76, 91, xii. 8.) We find also obscure notices of internal dissensions, which were allayed by the wisdom and moderation of Empedocles. (Diog. Laert. viii 2. § 64 — 67.) On occasion of the great Athenian expedition to Sicily in B.C. 415, Agrigentum maintained a strict neutrality, and not only declined sending auxiliaries to either party but refused to allow a passage through their territory to those of other cities. And even when the tide of fortune had turned decidedly against the Athenians, all the efforts of the Syracusan partisans within the walls of Agrigentum failed in inducing their fellow citizens to declare for the victorious party. (Thuc. vii. 32, 33, 46, 50, 58.)

A more formidable danger was at hand. The Carthaginians, whose intervention was invoked by the Segestans, were contented in their first expedition (B.C. 409) with the capture of Selinus and Himera: but when the second was sent in B.C. 406 it was Agrigentum that was destined to bear the first brunt of the attack. The luxurious habits of the Agrigentines had probably rendered them little fit for warfare, but they were supported by a body of mercenaries under the command of a Lacedaemonian named Dexippus, who occupied the citadel, and the natural strength of the city in great measure defied the efforts of the assailants. But notwithstanding these advantages and the efficient aid rendered them by a Syracusan army under Daphnaeus, they were reduced to such distress by famine that after a siege of eight months they found it impossible to hold out longer, and to avoid surrendering to the enemy, abandoned their city, and migrated to Gela. The sick and helpless inhabitants were massacred, and the city itself with all its wealth and magnificence plundered by the Carthaginians, who occupied it as their quarters during the winter, but completed its destruction when they quitted it in the spring, B.C. 405. (Diod. xiii. 80—91, 108; Xen. Hell. i. 5. § 21.)

Agrigentum never recovered from this fatal blow, though by the terms of the peace concluded with Dionycius by the Carthaginians, the fugitive inhabitants were permitted to return, and to occupy the ruined city, subject however to the Carthaginian rule, and on condition of not restoring the fortifications, a permission of which many appear to have availed themselves. (Diod. xiii. 1 14.) A few years later they were even able to shake off the yoke of Carthage and attach themselves to the cause of Dionysius, and the peace of B.C. 383, which fixed the river Halycus as the boundary of the Carthaginian dominions, must have left them in the enjoyment of their liberty; but though we find them repeatedly mentioned during the wars of Dionysuis