- either (a) in order to rationalize a story in which the motive was inadequate,
- or (b) because the version followed was one favourable to Miltiades.
Despite his chronological vagueness, Herodotus (vi. 132) clearly implies an interval between Marathon and the Parian expedition, in which Miltiades’ reputation stood very high.
[87] In some histories of Greece, discredit is cast upon Herodotus’ assertion that the preparation for the great invasion was begun in the last years of Darius. In the absence of evidence, this denial of the stated fact must rest on the basis of general probability.
In reference to this point I would urge that the most noticeable feature of Darius’ policy towards the west is its extreme tenacity of purpose. His plans had met with the severest checks in the course of their operation, yet he and his brother Artaphernes had persisted in their designs of conquest and acquisition in Europe, whenever circumstances rendered military and political interference possible.
[88] This is attributed in some Greek histories to the discovery of the treason of the Alkmæonidæ. So far from being caused by that, it took place in spite of it.
[89] Cf. Clinton, “Fasti Hellenici,” 113, 26.
The archon’s name recorded for Ol. 71, 4, is Themistocles. His identity with the great Themistocles is highly probable, though not certain.
Dionysius of Halikarnassos says that Themistocles was archon in the official year, 493–492.
[90] This point will be more fully discussed in dealing with the charges of corruption brought against Themistocles in Herodotus’ history of the war.
[91] Cf. Plut. Them. 4. ἔπραξε δὲ ταῦτα Μιλτιάδου κρατήσας ἀντιλέγοντος. ὡς ἱστορεῖ Στμσίμβροτος. Stesimbrotos is a fifth century writer.