Page:History of Greece Vol X.djvu/46

 24 HISTORY OF GREECE. king to another." Rather than concede this point of honor, he even broke off the negotiation, and resolved again to defend him- self to the uttermost. He was rescued, after the siege had been yet farther prolonged, by a dispute which broke out between the two commanders of the Persian army. Orontes, accusing Tiriba- zus of projected treason and rebellion against the king, in conjunc- tion with Sparta, caused him to be sent for as prisoner to Susa, and thus became sole commander. But as the besieging army was already wearied out by the obstinate resistance of Salamis, he consented to grant the capitulation, stipulating only for the tri- bute, and exchanging the offensive phrase . enforced by Tiribazus, for the amendment of the other side. 1 It was thus that Evagoras was relieved from his besieging ene- mies, and continued for the remainder of his life as tributary prince of Salamis under the Persians. He was no farther en- gaged in war, nor was his general popularity among the Salami- mans diminished by the hardships which they had gone through along with him. 2 His prudence calmed the rankling antipathy of the Great King, who would gladly have found a pretext for breaking the treaty. His children were numerous, and lived in harmony as well with him as with each other. Isokrates specially notices this fact, standing as it did in marked contrast with the family-relations of most of the Grecian despots, usually stained with jealousies, antipathies, and conflict, often with actual blood- shed. 3 But he omits to notice the incident whereby Evagoras perished ; an incident not in keeping with that superhuman good fortune and favor from the gods, of which the Panegyrical Ora- tion boasts as having been vouchsafed to the hero throughout his life. 4 It was seemingly not very long after the peace, that a Sa- 1 Diodor. xv, 8, 9. This remarkable anecdote, of susceptible Grecian honor on the part of Evagoras, is noway improbable, and seems safe to admit on the authority of Diodorus. Nevertheless, it forms so choice a morsel for a panegyrical discourse such as that of Isokrates, that one cannot but think he would have inserted it had it come to his knowledge. His silence causes great inrprise not without some suspicion as to the truth of the story. >f Evagoras than of Nikokles. 3 Isokrat. Or. ix, s. 88. Compare his Orat. viii, (De Pace) s. 138. 4 Isokrates, ib. s. 85. evrvxeorepov Kal -deo^L^earepov, etc.
 * Isokrates, Or. iii, (Nikokles) s. 40, a passage which must be more trna