History of the Peloponnesian War

This movement began first in the camp and from there spread to the city of Athens. Then certain men crossed over from Samos and had a conference with Alcibiades, and when he held out to them that he would first make Tissaphernes a friend and then the King also, if there were not a democracy —for so the King would have more confidence in them—the influential citizens, who are apt to bear the heaviest burdens, had great hopes for themselves personally that they would get the government into their own hands and prevail over the enemy as well.

So they went to Samos and set about combining in a conspiracy such men as were suitable, at the same time saying openly to the people that the King would be a friend to them and would furnish money if Alcibiades were restored and they were not ruled by a democracy. The multitude, even if at the moment it was somewhat dissatisfied with the scheme, none the less kept quiet because the prospect of pay from the King seemed easy of attainment;

while those who were trying to establish the oligarchy, as soon as they had made their designs known to the people, once more took up the proposals of Alcibiades for consideration among themselves and the majority of the members of the political clubs. And to most of these the proposals appeared practicable and trustworthy;

Phrynichus, however, who was still general, did not find them at all satisfactory, but was of opinion that Alcibiades had really no more desire for an oligarchy than for a democracy, and had no other object in view than in some manner, by bringing about in the state a change from its present order, to secure his own return at the invitation of his party associates. The Athenians, however, in the opinion of Phrynichus, must make it their chief concern to avoid being rent with factions. Neither was it in the interest of the King, he said, now that the Peloponnesians were at home on the sea quite as much as the Athenians and held possession of cities in his empire which were not the smallest, to attach himself to the Athenians, whom he did not trust, and thus involve himself in trouble, when it was possible to make friends of the Peloponnesians, from whom he had suffered no harm.

As for the allied cities, to which forsooth they would promise an oligarchical form of government for the reason that they themselves would not be under a democracy, he said that he knew well that neither those which had revolted from the Athenians would be any more likely to come back into the alliance nor would those which still remained allies be more staunch; for they would not want to be slaves with either an oligarchy or a democracy in preference to being free with whichever form they might perchance have such freedom.

And as to those who were called “the good and true” men,[*](ie. the aristocrats.) he said that the allies believed that they would bring them no less trouble than the popular party, being as they were providers[*](The πορισταὶ at Athens were a board appointed in times of financial difficulty to devise and propose (ἐσηγεῖσθαι) new sources of revenue.) and proposers to the people of evil projects from which they themselves got the most benefit. Indeed, so far as it rested with these men, they, the allies, would be put to death not only without trial but by methods even more violent, whereas the people were a refuge to themselves and a check upon the oligarchs.

This understanding of the matter, he asserted, the allied cities had gained from the facts themselves, and he was quite sure that this was their opinion. Therefore, to himself at least not one of the schemes that were being advocated by Alcibiades at the present time was satisfactory.