Page:History of Greece Vol X.djvu/384

 362 HISTORY OF GKEKCK. Both the Spartan king Agesilaus, with a thousand Lacedae- monian or Peloponnesian hoplites, and the Athenian general Chabrias, were invited to Egypt to command the forces of Tachos : the former on land, the latter at sea. Chabrias came simply as a volunteer, without any public sanction or order from Athens. But the service of Agesilaus was undertaken for the purposes and with the consent of the authorities at home, attested by the presence of thirty Spartans who came out as his counsellors. The Spartans were displeased with the Persian king for having sanctioned the independence of Messene ; and as the prospect of overthrowing or enfeebling his empire appeared at this moment considerable, they calculated on reaping a large reward for their services to the Egyptian prince, who would in return lend them assistance to- wards their views in Greece. But dissension and bad judgment marred all the combinations against the Persian king. Agesilaus, on reaching Egypt, 1 was received with little respect. The Egyp- tians saw with astonishment, that one, whom they had invited as a formidable warrior, was a little deformed old man, of mean attire, and sitting on the grass with his troops, careless of show or luxury. They not only vented their disappointment in sarcastic remarks, but also declined to invest him with the supreme command, as he had anticipated. He was only recognized as general of the mer- cenary land force, while Tachos himself commanded in chief, and Chabrias was at the head of the fleet. Great efforts were made to assemble a force competent to act against the Great King; and Chabrias is said to have suggested various stratagems for obtain- ing money from the Egyptians. 2 The army having been thus strengthened, Agesilaus, though discontented and indignant, never- theless accompanied Tachos on an expedition against the Persian forces in Phoenicia ; from whence they were forced to return by the revolt of Nektanebis, cousin of Tachos, who caused himself empire is so scanty and confused, that few of the facts can be said to b> certainly known. Diodorus has evidently introduced into the year 362-361 B. c. a series of events, many of them belonging to years before and after. Rehdantz (Vit. Iphicrat. Chabr. et. Timoth. p. 15t-161) brings together all the statements ; but unfortunately with little result. 1 Plutarch, Agesil. c. 36; Athenaeus, xiv, p. 616 D.; Cornelius jN^p*** Agesil. c. 8.
 * See Pseudo-Aristotel. (Economic, ii, 25.