Andokidês is solicited by his fel low-prison ers to stand forward and give information -he com plies. Every man in Athens felt the terrible sense of an internal conspiracy on the point of breaking out, perhaps along with an invasion of the foreigner— prevented only by the timely disclosure of Diokleidês, who was hailed as the saviour of the city, and carried in procession to dinner at the Prytaneium1. Miserable as the condition of the city was generally, yet more miserable was that of the prisoners confined. Moreover, worse, in every way, was still to be looked for-since the Athenians would know neither peace nor patience until they could reach, by some means or other, the names of the undisclosed conspirators. The female relatives and children of Andokidês and his companions were by permission along with them in the prison2, aggravating by their tears and wailings the affliction of the scene when Charmidês, one of the parties confined, addressed himself to Andokidês as his cousin and friend, imploring him to make a voluntary disclosure of all that he knew, in order to preserve the lives of so many innocent persons his immediate kinsmen, as well as to rescue the city out of a fe "You know (he verish alarm not to be endured. 1 Andokid. de Myst. sect. 41-46. 2 Andokid. de Myst. sect. 48: compare Lysias, Or. t. xiii. cont. Agorat. sect. 42. time soothe the terrors of the city." Such instances on the part of Charmidês', aided by the supplications of the other prisoners present, overcame the reluctance of Andokidês to become informer, and he next day made his disclosures to the senate. Euphilêtus (he said) was the chief author of the mutilation of the Hermæ. He proposed the deed at a convivial party where I was present-but I denounced it in the strongest manner and refused all compliance. Presently I broke my collar-bone and injured my head, by a fall from a young horse, so badly as to be confined to my bed; when Euphilêtus took the opportunity of my absence to assure the rest of the company falsely that I had consented, and that I had agreed to cut the Hermes near my paternal house, which the tribe Ægeïs have dedicated. Accordingly they executed the project while I was incapable of moving, without my knowledge: they presumed that I would undertake the mutilation of this particular Hermes—and you see that this is the only one in all Athens which has escaped injury. When the conspirators ascertained that I had not been a party, Euphilêtus and Melêtus threatened me with a terrible revenge unless I observed silence: to which I replied that it was not I, but their own crime, which had brought them into danger." Having recounted this tale (in substance) to the senate, Andokidês tendered his slaves, both male and female, to be tortured, in order that they might confirm his story that he was in his bed and unable 1 Plutarch (Alkib. c. 21) states that the person who thus addressed himself to, and persuaded, Andokidês, was named Timæus. From whom he got the latter name, we do not know. designates the authors of the mu tilation of the Hermæ -conse quence of his revela tions. Andokidês to leave it, on the night when the Hermæ were mutilated. It appears that the torture was actually applied (according to the custom so cruelly frequent at Athens in the case of slaves), and that the senators thus became satisfied of the truth of what Andokidês affirmed. He mentioned twenty-two names of citizens as having been the mutilators of the Hermæ. Eighteen of these names, including Euphilêtus and Melêtus, had already been specified in the information of Teukrus; the remaining four were, Panatius, Diakritus, Lysistratus, and Chæredêmus-all of whom fled the instant that their names were mentioned, without waiting the chance of being arrested. As soon as the senate heard the story of Andokidês, they proceeded to question Diokleidês over again; who confessed that he had given a false deposition, and begged for mercy, mentioning Alkibiadês the Phegusian (a relative of the commander in Sicily) and Amiantus, as having suborned him to the crime. Both of them fled immediately on this revelation; but Diokleidês was detained, sent before the dikastery for trial, and put to death'. Questionable author ity of An dokidês, as to what he himself really stated in information. The foregoing is the story which Andokidês, in the oration De Mysteriis delivered between fifteen and twenty years afterwards, represented himself to have communicated to the senate at this perilous crisis. But it probably is not the story which he really did tell certainly not that which his enemies represented him as having told: least of all does it communicate the whole truth, or afford any satisfaction to such anxiety and alarm as are described to 1 The narrative, which I have here given in substance, is to be found in Andokid. de Myst. sect. 48-66. have been prevalent at the time. Nor does it accord with the brief intimation of Thucydidês, who tells us that Andokidês impeached himself along with others as participant in the mutilation'. Among the accomplices against whom he informed, his enemies affirmed that his own nearest relatives were included -though this latter statement is denied by himself. We may be sure, therefore, that the tale which Andokidês really told was something very different from what now stands in his oration. But what it really was, we cannot make out. Nor should we gain much, even if it could be made out-since even at the time neither Thucydidês nor other intelligent critics could determine how far it was true. The mutilation of the Hermæ remained to them always an unexplained mystery; though they accounted Andokidês the principal organiser2. 1 Thucyd. vi. 60. Καὶ ὁ μὲν αὐτός τε καθ' ἑαυτοῦ καὶ κατ ̓ ἄλλων μηνύει τὸ τῶν Ερμῶν, &c. To the same effect, see the hostile oration of Lysias contra Andocidem, Or. vi. sect. 36, 37, 51: also Andokidês himself, De Mysteriis, sect. 71; De Reditu, sect. 7. If we may believe the Pseudo-Plutarch (Vit. X. Orator. p. 834), Andokidês had on a previous occasion been guilty of drunken irregularity and damaging a statue. 2 Thucyd. vi. 60. ἐνταῦθα ἀναπείθεται εἷς τῶν δεδεμένων, ὅσπερ ἐδόκει αἰτιώτατος εἶναι, ὑπὸ τῶν ξυνδεσμωτῶν τινὸς, εἴτε ἄρα καὶ τὰ ὄντα μηνῦσαι, εἴτε καὶ οὔ· ἐπ ̓ ἀμφότερα γὰρ εἰκάζεται· τὸ δὲ σαφὲς οὐδεὶς οὔτε τότε οὔτε ὕστερον ἔχει εἰπεῖν περὶ τῶν δρασάντων τὸ ἔργον. If the statement of Andokidês in the Oratio de Mysteriis is correct, the deposition previously given by Teukrus the metic must have been a true one; though this man is commonly denounced among the lying witnesses (see the words of the comic writer Phrynichus ap. Plutarch. Alkib. c. 20). Thucydidês refuses even to mention the name of Andokidês, and expresses himself with more than usual reserve about this dark transaction -as if he were afraid of giving offence to great Athenian families. The bitter feuds which it left behind at Athens, for years afterwards, are shown in the two orations of Lysias and of Andokidês. If the story of Belief of the Athe information -its tranquillising effects. That which is at once most important and most nians in his incontestable, is the effect produced by the revelations of Andokidês, true or false, on the public mind at Athens. He was a young man of rank and wealth in the city, belonging to the sacred family of the Kerykes-said to trace his pedigree to the hero Odysseus-and invested on a previous occasion with an important naval command; whereas the preceding informers had been metics and slaves. Moreover he was making confession of his own guilt. Hence the people received his communications with implicit confidence. They were so delighted to have got to the bottom of the terrible mystery, that the public mind subsided from its furious terrors into comparative tranquillity. The citizens again began to think themselves in safety and to resume their habitual confidence in each other, while the hoplites everywhere on guard were allowed to return to their homes'. All the prisoners in custody on suspicion, except those against whom Andokidês informed, were forthwith released: those who had fled out of apprehension, were allowed to return; while those whom he named as guilty, were tried, convicted, and put to death. Such of them as had already fled, were condemned to death in their absence, and a reward offered for their heads2. And though discerning men were not satisfied with the Didymus be true, that Thucydidês after his return from exile to Athens died by a violent death (see Biogr. Thucyd. p. xvii. ed. Arnold), it would seem probable that all his reserve did not protect him against private enmities arising out of his historical assertions. 1 Thucyd. vi. 60. Ὁ δὲ δῆμος ὁ τῶν ̓Αθηναίων ἄσμενος λαβὼν, ὡς CETO, Tò σapès, &c. : compare Andokid. de Mysteriis, sect. 67, 68. Andokid. de Myster. sect. 66; Thucyd. vi. 60; Philochorus, Fragment. 111, ed. Didot. |