Page:History of Greece Vol XI.djvu/237

 MACEDONIAN GOVfcBaMENT. 211 though such ceremonies were recognized and sometimes occurred, the occasions were rare in which they interposed any serious con- stitutional check upon the regal authority. 1 The facts of Mace- donian history, as far as they come before us, exhibit the kings acting on their own feelings and carrying out their own schemes consulting whom they please and when they please subject only to the necessity of not offending too violently the sentiments of that military population whom they commanded. Philip and Alexander, combining regal station with personal ability and un- exampled success, were more powerful than any of their prede- cessors. Each of them required extraordinary efforts from their soldiers, whom they were therefore obliged to keep in willing obe- 1 The trial of Philotas, who is accused by Alexander for conspiracy be- fore an assembly of the Macedonian soldiers near to head-quarters, is the example most insisted on of the prevalence of this custom, of public trial in criminal accusations. Quintus Curtius says (vi. 32. 25), "I)e capitali- bus rebus vetusto Macedonum more inquirebat exercitus; in pace erat vulgi: et nihil potestas regum valebat, nisi prius valuisset auctoritas." Compare Arrian, iii. 26 ; Diodor. xvii. 79, 80. That this was an ancient Macedonian custom, in reference to conspicu ous persons accused of treason, we may readily believe ; and that an officer of the great rank and military reputation of Philotas, if suspected of trca son, could hardly be dealt with in any other way. If he was condemned, all his relatives and kinsmen, whether implicated or not, became involved in the same condemnation. Several among the kinsmen of Philotas either tied or killed themselves; and Alexander then issued an edict pardoning them all, except Parmenio ; who was in Media, and whom he sent secret orders instantly to despatch. If the proceedings against Philotas, as de- scribed by Curtius, are to be taken as correct, it is rather an appeal made by Alexander to the soldiery, for their consent to his killing a daugeioos enemy, than an investigation of guilt or innocence. Olympias, during the intestine contests which followed after the death of Alexander, seems to have put to death as many illustrious Macedonians as she chose, without any form of trial. But when her enemy Kassander got the upper hand, subdued and captured her, he did not venture to put her to death without obtaining the consent of a Macedonian assembly (Diodor. xix. 11, 51 ; Justin, xiv. 6; Pausanias, i. 11, 2). These Macedonian assem- blies, insofar as we read of them, appear to be summoned chiefly as mjre instruments to sanction some predetermined purpose of the king or tho military leader predominant at the time. Flathe (Geschicht. Makedon. p. 43-45) greatly overrates, in my judgment, tho rights and powers enjoyed oy the Macedonian people.