Page:History of Greece Vol XI.djvu/257

 END OF THE SOCIAL WAR. 231 reinforced by additional bodies of mercenaries recently disbanded by the Persian satraps. With this entire force he gave battle to the king's troops under the command of Tithraustes, and gained a splendid victory ; upon which Artabazus remunerated him so liberally, as to place the whole Athenian army in temporary afflu- ence. The Athenians at home were at first much displeased with their general, for violating his instructions, and withdrawing his army from its prescribed and legitimate task. The news of his victory, however, and of the lucrative recompense following it, somewhat mollified them. But presently they learned that the Persian king, indignant at such a gratuitous aggression on their part, was equipping a large fleet to second the operations of their enemies. Intimidated by the prospect of Persian attack, they became anxious to conclude a peace with the revolted allies ; who, on their part, were not less anxious to terminate the war. Em- bassies being exchanged, and negotiations opened, in the ensuing year (355 B. c., the third of the war), a peace was sworn, whereby the Athenians recognized the complete autonomy, and severance from their confederacy, of the revolted cities, Chios, Rhodes, Kos, and Byzantium. 1 Such was the termination of the Social War, which fatally im- paired the power, and lowered the dignity, of Athens. Imper- pleased with such diversion from the regular purpose of the war, though the payment from Artabazus afterwards partially reconciled them to it ; which is somewhat different from the statement of Diodorus. From an inscription (cited in Rehdantz, Vitse Iphicratis, Chabria, etc., p. .'58) we make out that Chares, Charidemus, and Phokion, were about this time in joint-command of the Athenian fleet near Lesbos, and that they were in some negotiation as to pecuniary supplies with the Persian Orontes on the mainland. But the inscription is so mutilated, that no distinct mat- ter of fact can be ascertained. 1 Diodor. xvi. 22. I place little reliance on the Argument prefixed to the Oration of Isokrates De Pace. As far as I am able to understand the facts of this obscure period, it appears to me that the author of that Ar- gument has joined them together erroneously, and misconceived the situa- tisn. The assertion of Demosthenes, in the Oration against Lcptines (p. 481. s. 90), respecting the behavior of the Chians towards the memory of Cha- brias, seems rather to imply that the peace with Chios had been concluded before that oration was delivered. It was delivered in the very year of the ?eace 355 B. c.