soon acknowledged that where severity was required, no mau was ever more moderate; or if mildness was necessary, no man kept up his dignity better than Pericles. And his so much envied authority, to which they had given the name of monarchy and tyranny, then appeared to have been the bulwark of the state-so much corruption and such a rage of wickedness broke out upon the commonwealth after his death, which he, by proper restraints, had palliated and kept from dangerous and destructive extremes."*

This is the testimony of all the great men who were contemporaries of Pericles-that is, of the greatest thinkers and reasoners that have ever lived; whereas none worthy of credence prefer any serious charge against him. We have already alluded to certain accusations made against him at different times by those who were jealous of his power and anxious to obtain it for themselves; we have also seen that any of them that were capable of being investigated were found to be erroneous and set aside as such. Thus foiled in various efforts, his enemies had but one means left to injure his character; they could only pretend that he led a vicious life, and that so far as he could he made the most beautiful of the wives and daughters of the Athenians as vicious as himself. Had he been what they represented him, they would not have attempted to libel him in this base manner; but they knew that he never had any one prosecuted or deprived of his liberty for anything however false or slanderous he might say of himself. This was one of the reasons why he was able to congratulate himself as he did at the close of a long life, that he had never caused an Athenian to put on mourning.

We will now see what was the nature of the slanders alluded to-not because we believe they have any reasonable foundation, but in order to show how much philosophy, fortitude, and forbearance it required to allow their authors to escape unpunished. "La debauche des femmes," says Bayle, "fut l'un des vices qu'on lui reprocha plus." Not content with vilifying him in private, the lower grade of poets represented the female members of his family on the stage as guilty of the grossest excesses, making himself, however, more licentious and more shameless than all. That he had some intrigues with women, and did not confine his amours within the bounds prescribed by the Athen

*Plutarch in Vita.

ian laws, cannot be denied. It may be added that conduct like his in this respect would be severely censured at the present day; but what he was known to have really done was exaggerated beyond all reasonable bounds; or rather, it was made the pretext of accusing him with every species of depravity which lust in its worst form could suggest.

His first wife was a relative of his own. She had previously been married to Hipponnicus, by whom she had one son. We are informed that Pericles had two sons by her; that he then became disgusted with her and gave her to another man; and that she was quite as willing for the change as he. Soon after he became attached to Aspasia, one of the most beautiful and most accomplished women of her time, but whose reputation, whether justly or unjustly, has been much sullied. In short, her character has come down to us as that of a courtesan; although Plutarch and others tell us that Socrates was in the habit of visiting her regularly and taking his friends with him in order to discuss questions in rhetoric and politics with her. The real motive of the philosopher in visiting her might be doubted, however, were it not that some of the first citizens of Athens visited her in company with their wives, in order that the latter might profit by the charms of her conversation.

This would show that whatever indiscretions she may have been guilty of, she was by no means a degraded woman; at least that she was not regarded as such. Speaking of Pericles' first wife, Plutarch says: "She was married to another, and he took Aspasia, for whom he had the tenderest regard; insomuch that he never went out upon business or returned without saluting her." Now, does it follow that because he was thus attached to Aspasia, whether it be true that he was married to her or not, he must have been a libertine who used all his influence to debauch the wives and daughters of the Athenians? Still less logical is it to suppose that it was to gratify her whims he declared war against the Samians, Megarians, and others, and thus gave rise to the Peloponnesian war. Yet his enemies made both charges against him, and several others on no better grounds. Even his friendship for great artists was made a basis of accusation against him, as, for example, in the case of Phidias, the most renowned sculptor of all antiquity, who was said to invite the Athenian ladies to see his sculptures, only in order that they might gratify the lust of Pericles. Pyrilampes, another friend, was said to keep a large collection of curious and beautiful birds,

for no other purpose than to make presents of them to such women as granted favors to Pericles. Lest all this might not seem sufficiently odious, particular cases of seduction were alleged against him; and finally, his detractors proceeded so far in their villany as to accuse him of having debauched his son's wife. In recording this fact, Plutarch remarks, with his usual candor and love of justice: "But what wonder is it, if men of a satirical turn daily sacrificed the characters of the great to that malevolent demon, the envy of the multitude, when Stesembrotus of Thasos has dared to lodge against Pericles that horrid and groundless accusation of corrupting his son's wife ?"

We need only notice one charge more of this kind, that respecting Elpinice, the sister of Cimon, whom he is accused of having corrupted while she was trying to gain his sympathy in favor of her brother, when it was generally believed that he would be sentenced to death. What the lady had said to him on his return from the conquest of the Samians, while other ladies were enthusiastic in their praise of his bravery and generalship, and the reply which he is said to have made to her, would be almost sufficient, without any further evidence, to show that there was no truth in the allegation. The version of Plutarch is that “Elpinice before this had softened the resentment of Pericles against Cimon, and procured her brother a milder sentence than that of death. Pericles was one of those appointed by the people to manage the impeachment; and when Elpinice addressed him as a suppliant, he smiled and said, 'You are old, Elpinice; much too old to solicit in so weighty an affair.' However," adds the historian," he rose up but once to speak, barely to acquit himself of his trust, and did not bear so hard upon Cimon as the rest of his accusers." But as we have said, the chief, if not the only foundation for all these charges is his admitted intimacy with Aspasia. Now, if she had been the infamous woman she is represented by his enemies, is it likely that the Athenians would have bestowed on her son the rights of citizenship, and allowed him to assume the name of Pericles, and inherit his estate?

It is still more unlikely that Pericles himself would have taken the pains he did to save her when she was prosecuted for impiety, had her character been such as it has been represented by her enemies; for Æschinas tells us that he not only defended her before her accusers with all the power of his wonderful eloquence, but that he shed many tears in im

ploring mercy for her, begging those who thirsted for her blood to remember that whatever might be said of her conduct in early life, when even the wisest of men are thoughtless, he had ever found her faithful and devoted to him. He succeeded in saving her; but he did not expect the same indulgence for Anaxagoras, who was accused of the same crime that of speaking disrespectfully of the popular religion, and "introducing new opinions about celestial appearances." He therefore caused his old friend. to leave the city, accompanying him a part of the way, giving him all the money he required, and bidding him an affectionate adieu. If we must assume that Aspasia was a bad woman because she was accused in this manner by the Athenians, must we not also assume that Anaxagoras was a bad man? Nay, we must pass a similar judgment on Phidias, for he, too, was prosecuted, and died in prison for no other crime than that he was patronized by Pericles, and was a believer in his philosophy. But we have more satisfactory evidence than even this in her favor, namely, the language of respect and esteem in which the greatest philosophers and severest moralists of the day speak of her son. A passage from Xenophon will sufficiently illustrate this. The following extract will give an idea of the opinions entertained of both father and son by those best qualified to estimate their worth:

Conversing, on one occasion, with Pericles, the son of the great Pericles, Socrates said, "I have hopes, Pericles, that under your leadership the city will become more eminent and famous in military affairs, and will get the better of her enemies." "I wish, Socrates," said Pericles, "that what you say may happen; but how such effects are to be produced, I cannot understand." "Are you willing, then," asked Socrates, "that we should have some conversation on these points, and consider how far there is a possibility of effecting what we desire?" "I am quite willing," replied Pericles. "Are you aware, then," said Socrates, "that the Athenians are not at all inferior in number to the Boeotians?" "I am," said Pericles. "And whether do you think that a greater number of efficient and well-formed men could be selected from the Boeotians, or from the Athenians?" "The Athenians do not appear to me to be inferior in this respect." "And which of the people do you consider to be more united among themselves?" "I think that the Athenians are; for many of the Boeotians, being oppressed by the Thebans, entertain hostile feelings towards them. But at Athens I see nothing of the kind." "But the Athenians are, moreover, of all people, most eager for honor, and most friendly in disposition; qualities which most effectually impel men to face danger in the cause of glory, and of their country.' "The Athenians are certainly not to be found fault with in these respects." "And assuredly there is no people that can boast of greater or more numerous exploits of their ancestors than the Athenians; a circumstance by which many are prompted and stimulated to cultivate manly

courage, and to become brave." "All that you say is true, Socrates, but you see that since the slaughter of the thousand occurred at Lebdeia, under Tolmides, and that at Delium, under Hippocrates, the reputation of the Athenians has suffered as far as regards the Boeotians, and the spirit of the Baotians has been raised as far as regards the Athenians, so that the Boeotians, indeed, who formerly did not dare, even on their own soil, to meet the Athenians in the field, without the aid of the Spartans and other Peloponnesians, now threaten to invade Attica singlehanded; while the Athenians, who formerly, when the Boeotians were unsupported, ravaged Boeotia, are afraid lest the Boeotians should lay waste Attica." "I perceive, indeed," said Socrates, "that such is the case; but the city seems to me now to be more favorably disposed for any good general; for confidence produces in men carelessness, indolence, and disobedience, but fear renders them more attentive, obedient, and orderly. You may form a notion of this from people in a ship; for as long as they fear nothing they are all in disorder, but as soon as they begin to dread a storm, or the approach of an enemy, they not only do everything that they are told to do, but are hushed in silence, waiting for the directions to be given, like a band of dancers." "Well, then," said Pericles, "if they would now, assuredly, obey, it would be time for us to discuss how we might incite them to struggle to regain their ancient spirit, glory, and happiness." "If, then," said Socrates, we wished them to claim property of which others were in possession, we should most effectively urge them to lay claim to it if we proved that it belonged to their fathers, and was their rightful inheritance; and since we wish that they should strive for pre-eminence in valor, we must show them that such pre-eminence was indisputably theirs of old; and that if they now exert themselves to recover it, they will be the most powerful of all people." "How, then, can we convince them of this?" "I think that we may do so if we remind them that they have heard that their most ancient forefathers, of whom we have any knowledge, were the bravest of men."*

It seems to us that no one capable of forming an unprejudiced opinion can examine all the facts bearing on the subject which have any claim to be regarded as testimony, and come to the conclusion that Pericles was more vicious or licentious than most prominent men of his time-nay, most public men of the present day. But even those who accept the statements of his enemies, and regard him as a libertine who had no respect for female virtue, must admit that if he was guilty of this, no other misconduct can fairly be laid to his charge. By the universal voice of historians, biographers, and critics, he stands wholly exculpated from any other accusation that has ever been made against him. His character as a statesman and ruler is wholly unsullied by the slightest blemish; it is a model worthy of imitation for all future ages. The one who has made the nearest approach to him in modern times in the most prominent features of his character as a public man, is Lorenzo de Medici,

* Memorabilia of Socrates, Book III., Chap. V.