nothing farther; and the thing in dispute at this time, says he, is not strength, but valour. The only thing Aristomenes was reproached for, was his not being wounded; therefore he confined himself to that point, and answered in the following manner: "I am," says he, "called fortunate, because I have escaped from the battle without wounds. If that were owing to my cowardice, I should deserve another epithet than that of fortunate; and instead of being admitted to dispute the prize, ought to undergo the rigour of the laws that punish cowards. But what is objected to me as a crime, is in truth my greatest glory. For, if my enemies, astonished at my valour, durst not venture to attack or oppose me, it is no small degree of merit, that I made them fear me; or if while they engaged me, I had at the same time strength to cut them in pieces, and skill to guard against their attacks, I must then have been at once both valiant and prudent. For whoever, in the midst of an engagement, can expose himself to danger with caution and security, shows that he excels at the same time both in the virtues of the mind and the body. As for courage, no man living can reproach Cleonnis with any want of it; but, for his honour's sake, I am sorry that he should appear to want gratitude." After the conclusion of these harangues, the question was put to the vote. The whole army was in suspense, and impatiently waited for the decision. No dispute could be so warm and interesting as this. It is not a competition for gold or silver, but solely for honour. The proper reward of virtue is pure disinterested glory. Here the judges are unsuspected. The actions of the competitors. still speak for them. It is the king himself, surrounded with his officers, who presides and adjudges. A whole army are the witnesses. The field of battle is a tribunal without partiality and cabal. In short, all the votes concurred in favour of Aristomenes, and adjudged him the prize. Euphaes, the king, died not many days after the decision of this affair.* He had reigned thirteen years, and during all that time had been engaged in war with the Lacedæmonians. As he died without children, he left the Messenians at liberty to choose his successor. Cleonnis and Damis were candidates in opposition to Aristomenes; but he was elected king in preference to them. When he was on the throne, he did not scruple to confer on his two principal good, even more than to their own glory; competitors, but not enemies, these great men were actuated by a zeal for their country, and were neither friends nor adversaries to one another, but for its preservation. In this relation, I have followed the opinion of the late Monsieur Boivin, the elder, and have made use of his learned dissertation upon a fragment of Diodorus Siculus, which the world was little acquainted with. He supposes, and proves in it, that the king spoken of in that fragment is Euphaes, and that Aristomenes is the same that Pausanias called Aristodemus, according to the custom of the ancients, who are called by two different names.† Aristomenes, otherwise called Aristodemus, reigned near seven years, and was equally esteemed and beloved by his subjects. The war still continued all this time. Towards the end of his reign he beat the Lacedæmonians, took their king Theopompus, and, in honour of Jupiter and Ithoma, sacrificed three hundred of them, among whom the king was the principal victim. Shortly after, Aristodemus sacrificed himself upon the tomb of his daughter, in conformity to the answer of an oracle. Damis was his successor, but without taking upon him the title of king. After his death, the Messenians had never any success in their affairs, but found themselves in a very wretched and hopeless condition.§ Being reduced *Pausan. 1. iv. p. 235, 241. Clem. Alex. in protrep. p. 20. Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions, Vol. II. p 84-113. to the last extremity, and utterly destitute of provisions, they abandoned Ithoma, and fled to such of their allies as were nearest to them. The city was immediately razed, and all the people that remained submitted. They were made to engage by oath never to forsake the party of the Lacedæmonians, and never to revolt from them; a very useless precaution, only proper to make them add the guilt of perjury to their rebellion. Their new masters imposed no tribute upon them, but contented themselves with obliging them to bring to the Spartan market, one half of the corn they should reap every harvest. It was likewise stipulated, that the Messenians, both men and women, should attend in mourning the funerals of the kings, the chief citizens of Sparta; which the Lacedæmonians probably looked upon as a mark of dependence, and as a kind of homage paid to their nation. Thus ended the first Messenian war, after having lasted twenty years.* THE SECOND MESSENIAN WAR. THE lenity with which the Lacedæmonians treated the Messenians at first, was of no long duration. When once they found the whole country had sub mitted, and thought the people incapable of giving them any further trouble, they returned to their natural character of insolence and haughtiness, that often degenerated into cruelty, and sometimes even into ferocity. Instead of treating the vanquished with kindness, as friends and allies, and endeavouring by gentle methods to win those whom they had subdued by force, they seemed intent upon nothing but aggravating their yoke, and making them feel the whole weight of subjection. They laid heavy taxes upon them, delivered them up to the avarice of the collectors of those taxes, gave no ear to their complaints, rendered them no justice, treated them like vile slaves, and committed the most heinous outrages against them. Man, who is born for liberty, can never reconcile himself to servitude; the most gentle slavery exasperates, and provokes him to rebel. What could be expected, then, from so cruel a one as that under which the Messenians groaned? After having endured it with great uneasiness near forty years, they resolved to throw off the yoke, and to recover their ancient liberty. This was in the fourth year of the twenty-third Olympiad ;§ the office of archon at Athens was then made annual; and Anaxander and Anaxidamus reigned at Sparta. The Messenians' first care was, to strengthen themselves with the alliance of the neighbouring nations. These they found well inclined to enter into their views, as very agreeable to their own interests. For it was not without jealousy and apprehension, that they saw so powerful a city rising up in the midst of them, which manifestly seemed to aim at extending her dominion over all the rest. The people, therefore, of Elis, the Argives and Sicyonians, declared for the Messenians. But before their forces were joined, a battle was fought between the Lacedæmonians and Messenians. Aristomenes, the second of that name, was at the head of the latter. He was a commander of intrepid courage, and of great abilities in war. The Lacedæmonians were beaten in this engagement. Aristomenes, to give the enemy at first an advantageous opinion of his bravery, knowing what influence it has on the success of future enterprises, boldly ventured to enter into Sparta by night, and upon the gate of the temple of Minerva, who was surnamed Chalciecos to hang up a shield, on which was an inscription, signifying that it was a present offered by Aristomenes to the goddess, out of the spoils of the Lacedæmonians This bravado did in reality astonish the Lacedæmonians. But they were still more alarmed at the formidable league that was formed against them *A. M. 3281. Ant. J. C. 723. Pausan. 1. iv. p. 242-261. Justin. 1. iii. c. 5. Cum per complurcs annos gravia servitutis verbera, plerumque ac vincula, cæteraque captivitatis make perpessi essent, post longam pœnarum patientiam bellum instaurant.-Justin. 1. iii. c. 5. A. M. 3320. Ant. J. C. 684. According to several historians, there was another Aristomenes in the first Messenian war.-Diod. }, zv. p. 378. The Delphic oracle, which tney consulted, in order to know by what means they should be successful in this war, directed them to send to Athens for a commander, and to submit to his counsel and conduct. This was a very mortifying step to so haughty a city as Sparta. But the fear of incurring the god's displeasure by a direct disobedience, prevailed over all other considerations. They sent an embassy, therefore, to the Athenians. The people of Athens were somewhat perplexed at this request. On the one hand, they were not sorry to see the Lacedæmonians at war with their neighbours, and were far from desiring to furnish them with a good general; on the other, they were afraid also of disobeying the god. To extricate themselves out of this difficulty, they offered the Lacedæmonians a person called Tyrtæus. He was a poet by profession, and had something original in the turn of his mind, and disagreeable in his person, for he was lame. Notwithstanding these defects, the Lacedæmonians received him as a general sent them by heaven itself. Their successes did not at first answer their expectation, for they lost three battles successively. The kings of Sparta, discouraged by so many disappointments, and out of all hopes of better success for the future, were absolutely bent upon returning to Sparta, and marching home again with their forces. Tyrtæus opposed this design very warmly, and at length brought them over to his opinion. He ad dressed the troops, and repeated to them some verses he had made on the occasion, and on which he had bestowed great pains and application. He first endeavoured to comfort them for their past losses, which he imputed to no fault of theirs, but only to ill fortune, or to fate, which no human wisdom can surmount. He then represented to them, what a shame it would be for Spartans to fly from an enemy, and how glorious it would be for them rather to perish sword in hand in fighting for their country, if it was so decreed by fate. Then, as if all danger was vanished, and the gods, fully satisfied and appeased with their late calamities, were entirely turned to their side, he set victory before their eyes as present and certain, and as if she herself was inviting them to battle. All the ancient authors who have made any mention of the style and character of Tyrtæus's poetry,* observe, that it was full of a certain fire, ardour, and enthusiasm, that animated the minds of men, that exalted them above themselves, that inspired them with something generous and martial, that extinguished all fear and apprehension of danger or death, and made them wholly intent upon the preservation of their country and their own glory.† Tyrtæus's verses had really this effect on the soldiers upon this occasion. They desired with one voice to march against the enemy. Being wholly indifferent as to their lives, they had no thoughts but to secure to themselves the honour of a burial. To this end they all tied bands round their right arms, on which were inscribed their own and their fathers' names, that if they chanced to be killed in the battle, and to have their faces so altered through time or accidents, as not to be distinguishable, it might certainly be known who each of them was by these marks. Soldiers determined to die are very valiant. This appeared in the battle that ensued. It was very bloody, the victory being a long time disputed on both sides; but at last the Messenians gave way. When Tyrtæus went afterwards to Sparta, he was received with the greatest marks of distinction, and incorporated into the body of citizens. The gaining of this battle did not put an end to the war, which had already lasted three years. Aristomenes, having assembled the remains of his army, retired to the top of a mountain of difficult access, which was called Ira. The conquerors attempted to carry the place by assault; but that brave prince defended himself there for the space of eleven years, and performed the most extraordinary actions of bravery. He was at last obliged to quit it only by surprise and treachery, after having defended it like a lion. Such of the Messenians as fell into the hands of the Lacedæmonians on this occasion, were reduced to the condition of the Helots, or slaves. The rest, seeing their country ruined, went and settled at Zancle, a city in Sicily, which afterwards took its name from this people, and was called Messana; the same place called at this day Messina. Aristomenes, after having conducted one of his daughters to Rhodes, whom he had given in marriage to the tyrant of that place, thought of passing on to Sardis, and to remain with Ardys, king of the Lydians, or to Ecbatana, with Phraortes, king of the Medes; but death prevented the execution of all his designs. The second Messenian war was of fourteen years' duration, and ended the first year of the twenty-seventh Olympiad.* There was a third war between these people and the Lacedæmonians, which hegan both at the time, and on the occasion, of a great earthquake that hap pened at Sparta. We shall speak of this war in its place. The history, of which it remains for me to treat in this work, is that of the successors of Alexander, and comprehends the space of two hundred and ninety-three years; from the death of that monarch, and the commencement of the reign of Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, in Egypt, to the death of Cleopatra, when that kingdom became a Roman province, under the emperor Augustus. This history will present to our view a series of all the crimes which usually arise from inordinate ambition; scenes of jealousy and perfidious conduct, treason, ingratitude, and crying abuses of sovereign power, cruelty, impiety, an utter oblivion of the natural sentiments of probity and honour, with the violation of all laws human and divine, will rise before us. We shall behold nothing but fatal dissensions, destructive wars, and dreadful revolutions. Men originally friends, brought up together, and natives of the same country, companions in the same dangers, and instrun.ents in the accomplishment of the same exploits and victories, will conspire to tear in pieces the empire they had all concurred to form at the expense of their blood. We shall see the captains of Alexander sacrifice the mother, the wives, the brother, the sisters of that prince, to their ambition; and without sparing even those to whom they either owed or gave life. We shall no longer behold those glorious times of Greece, that were once so productive of great men, and great examples; or if we should happen to discover some traces and remains of them, they will only resemble the gleams of lightning that shoot along in a rapid track, and are only remarkable from the profound darkness that precedes and follows them. I acknowledge myself to be sufficiently sensible how much a writer is to be pitied, who is obliged to represent human nature in such colours and lineaments as dishonour her, and which cannot fail of inspiring disgust and a secret affliction in the minds of those who are made spectators of such a picture. History loses whatever is most interesting and most capable of conveying pleasure and instruction, when she can only produce those effects, by inspir ing the mind with horror for criminal actions, and by a representation of the calamities which usually succeed them, and are to be considered as their just punishment. It is difficult to engage the attention of a reader for any considerable time, on objects which only raise his indignation; and it would be affronting him, to seem desirous of dissuading him from the excess of inordinate passions of which he conceives himself incapable. How is it possible to diffuse any interest through a narration, which has nothing to offer but a uniform series of vices and great crimes, and which makes it necessary to enter into a particular detail of the actions and characters of men, born for the calamity of the human race, and whose very names should not be transmitted to posterity? It may even be thought dangerous to * A. M. 3334. Ant. J. C. 670. familiarize the minds of the generality of mankind to uninterrupted scenes of too successful inquity; and to be particular in describing the unjust success which waited on those illustrious criminals, the long duration of whose prosperity being frequently attended with the privileges and rewards of virtue, may be thought an imputation on Providence by persons of weak understandings. This history, which seems likely to prove very disagreeable from the reasons I have just mentioned, will become more so from the obscurity and confusion in which the several transactions will be involved, and which it will be difficult, if not impossible, to remedy. Ten or twelve of Alexander's captains were engaged in a course of hostilities against each other, for the partition of his empire after his death, and to secure themselves some portion, greater or less, of that vast body. Sometimes feigned friends, sometimes declared enemies, they are continually forming different parties and leagues, which are to subsist no longer than is consistent with the interest of each individual. Macedonia changed its masters five or six times in a very short space; by what means then can order and perspicuity be preserved, in a prodigious variety of events that are perpetually crossing and breaking in upon each other? Besides which, I am no longer supported by any ancient authors capable of conducting me through this darkness and confusion. Diodorus will entirely abandon me, after having been my guide for some time; and no other historian will appear to take his place. No proper series of affairs will remain; the several events are not to be disposed into any regular connexion with each other; nor will it be possible to point out, either the motives to the resolutions formed, or the proper character of the principal actors in this scene of obscurity. I think myself happy when Polybius, or Plutarch, lend me their assistance. In my account of Alexander's successors, whose transactions are perhaps the most complicated and perplexed part of ancient history, Usher, Prideaux, and Vaillant, will be my usual guides; and, on many occasions, shall only transcribe from Prideaux ; but with all these aids, I shall not promise to throw so much light on this history as I could desire. After a war of more than twenty years, the number of the principal competitors was reduced to four: Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleucus, and Lysimachus: the empire of Alexander was divided into four fixed kingdoms, agreeably to the prediction of Daniel, by a solemn treaty concluded between the parties. Three of these kingdoms, Egypt, Macedonia, Syria or Asia, will have a regular succession of monarchs, sufficiently clear and distinct; but the fourth, which comprehended Thrace, with part of the Lesser Asia, and some neigh bouring provinces, will suffer a number of variations. As the kingdom of Egypt was subject to the fewest changes, because Ptolemy, who was established there as a governor at the death of Alexander, retained the possession of it ever after, and left it to his posterity; we shall therefore consider this prince as the basis of our chronology, and our several epochs shall be fixed from him. The third volume contains the events for the space of one hundred and twenty years, under the first four kings of Egypt, viz. Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, who reigned thirty-eight years; Ptolemy Philadelphus, who reigned forty; Ptolemy Euergetes, who reigned twenty-five; and Ptolemy Philopator, whose reign continued seventeen. In order to throw some light upon the history contained therein, I shall, in the first place, give the principal events of it in a chronological abridge ment. Introductory to which, I must desire the reader to accompany me in some reflections, which have not escaped Monsieur Bossuet, with relation to Alexander. This prince, who was the most renowned and illustrious conqueror in all history, was the last monarch of his race. Macedonia, his ancient kingdom, which his ancestors had governed for so many ages, was invaded from all quarters as a vacant succession; and after it had long been a prey to the |