and his culture and, at the
same time, show that he was using them for the greatest benefit of the community.
The Lawsuit against Cimon: Presenting Himself as an Opponent
After that first burst of glory, Pericles remained in the shadows for several years.
Was it for fear of being ostracized as his father, Xanthippus, had been? That is Plutarch’s
version of the matter ( Pericles , 7.1), but it is not possible tocorroborate what he says. However, the young man did not remain inactive, for he proved
his attachment to the city on the battlefield: again according to Plutarch, “he was
courageous in warfare and willingly risked his life.” 44 His real entry into political life was deferred for a while, but eventually it came
about following an extremely spectacular lawsuit. As the Pseudo-Aristotle notes in
his Constitution of the Athenians (27.1): “Having first distinguished himself when still a young man he challenged
the audits of Cimon, who was a general.” 45
This came about in 463 B.C., when Pericles had just turned thirty. At this time, Cimon
held great influence in the city, particularly since Themistocles had been ostracized
in 471. Cimon, who was elected repeatedly as stratēgos , was at this time playing a prominent part in every military campaign. He led the
expedition that came to the aid of Sparta after the Helots, dependents of the Spartans,
taking advantage of the great earthquake that occurred in 464, had revolted against
their masters. By 465, he was already to be found heading the siege of Thasos, an
island in the northern Aegean that was trying to free itself from the Delian League.
In 463, while the campaign against Thasos dragged on, Cimon had to face a lawsuit
centering on his rendering of accounts, an obligation that affected all magistrates. 46 The stratēgos was accused of accepting bribes from the king of Macedon, who was anxious to protect
his kingdom from Athenian attacks. The prosecution, which was led by Pericles, came
to nothing, for an obvious enough reason: up until the reforms of Ephialtes, passed
by vote in the following year, renderings of accounts were all judged by the Areopagus,
which was the principal supporter of Cimon’s policies!
Over and above the issue of this trial, which proved favorable to Cimon, this anecdote
testifies to the general role played by prosecutions in the construction of political
reputations: prosecutions were above all the business of young ambitious men. While
assuming the position of a prosecutor was a way to make one’s name swiftly, in the
long run it was a difficult position to maintain. To remain a prosecutor for too long
was to risk being regarded as a sycophant, a professional prosecutor. 47 While such “sycophants” were necessary to the functioning of democracy, given the
absence of any public prosecution service in Athens, they were at the same time detested
because they acted for their own personal profit, in that they could receive a percentage
of the fines imposed if the verdict was guilty. 48
The reasons why Pericles involved himself personally in this process remain to be
determined. Was he motivated by purely political aspirations, as an honest defender
of the interests of the people? That is by no means certain. Between Cimon’s lineage
and that of Pericles, there was a long tradition of rivalry or even animosity that
dated from the mid-sixth century, when theirrespective ancestors had battled to win the hand in marriage of Agariste, the daughter
of the tyrant of Sicyon, a struggle in which the Alcmaeonid Megacles had emerged as
victor. Furthermore, in 493, the Alcmaeonids had accused Miltiades, Cimon’s father,
of exercising tyranny in the Chersonese. 49 Finally, in 489, Xanthippus brought a second lawsuit against Miltiades, following
the disastrous expedition to Paros: Pericles’ father had identified himself with the
antipathies of his in-laws, to the point
same time, show that he was using them for the greatest benefit of the community.
The Lawsuit against Cimon: Presenting Himself as an Opponent
After that first burst of glory, Pericles remained in the shadows for several years.
Was it for fear of being ostracized as his father, Xanthippus, had been? That is Plutarch’s
version of the matter ( Pericles , 7.1), but it is not possible tocorroborate what he says. However, the young man did not remain inactive, for he proved
his attachment to the city on the battlefield: again according to Plutarch, “he was
courageous in warfare and willingly risked his life.” 44 His real entry into political life was deferred for a while, but eventually it came
about following an extremely spectacular lawsuit. As the Pseudo-Aristotle notes in
his Constitution of the Athenians (27.1): “Having first distinguished himself when still a young man he challenged
the audits of Cimon, who was a general.” 45
This came about in 463 B.C., when Pericles had just turned thirty. At this time, Cimon
held great influence in the city, particularly since Themistocles had been ostracized
in 471. Cimon, who was elected repeatedly as stratēgos , was at this time playing a prominent part in every military campaign. He led the
expedition that came to the aid of Sparta after the Helots, dependents of the Spartans,
taking advantage of the great earthquake that occurred in 464, had revolted against
their masters. By 465, he was already to be found heading the siege of Thasos, an
island in the northern Aegean that was trying to free itself from the Delian League.
In 463, while the campaign against Thasos dragged on, Cimon had to face a lawsuit
centering on his rendering of accounts, an obligation that affected all magistrates. 46 The stratēgos was accused of accepting bribes from the king of Macedon, who was anxious to protect
his kingdom from Athenian attacks. The prosecution, which was led by Pericles, came
to nothing, for an obvious enough reason: up until the reforms of Ephialtes, passed
by vote in the following year, renderings of accounts were all judged by the Areopagus,
which was the principal supporter of Cimon’s policies!
Over and above the issue of this trial, which proved favorable to Cimon, this anecdote
testifies to the general role played by prosecutions in the construction of political
reputations: prosecutions were above all the business of young ambitious men. While
assuming the position of a prosecutor was a way to make one’s name swiftly, in the
long run it was a difficult position to maintain. To remain a prosecutor for too long
was to risk being regarded as a sycophant, a professional prosecutor. 47 While such “sycophants” were necessary to the functioning of democracy, given the
absence of any public prosecution service in Athens, they were at the same time detested
because they acted for their own personal profit, in that they could receive a percentage
of the fines imposed if the verdict was guilty. 48
The reasons why Pericles involved himself personally in this process remain to be
determined. Was he motivated by purely political aspirations, as an honest defender
of the interests of the people? That is by no means certain. Between Cimon’s lineage
and that of Pericles, there was a long tradition of rivalry or even animosity that
dated from the mid-sixth century, when theirrespective ancestors had battled to win the hand in marriage of Agariste, the daughter
of the tyrant of Sicyon, a struggle in which the Alcmaeonid Megacles had emerged as
victor. Furthermore, in 493, the Alcmaeonids had accused Miltiades, Cimon’s father,
of exercising tyranny in the Chersonese. 49 Finally, in 489, Xanthippus brought a second lawsuit against Miltiades, following
the disastrous expedition to Paros: Pericles’ father had identified himself with the
antipathies of his in-laws, to the point
Similar Books
