πρὶν δὲ ἢ συγγράφειν με τὸν πόλεμον καὶ ὁπόσα πολεμοῦσιν ἑκατέροις ὁ δαίμων παθεῖν ἢ δρᾶσαι παρεσκεύασε, διακρῖναί τι καὶ ἡλικίας πέρι ἠθέλησα ἀνδρὸς Μεσσηνίου. τὸν γὰρ πόλεμον τοῦτον γενόμενον μὲν Λακεδαιμονίων καὶ τῶν συμμάχων πρὸς Μεσσηνίους καὶ τοὺς ἐπικούρους, ὀνομασθέντα δὲ οὐκ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐπιστρατευσάντων ὥσπερ γε ὁ Μηδικὸς καὶ ὁ Πελοποννήσιος, Μεσσήνιον δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν συμφορῶν, καθὰ δὴ καὶ τὸν ἐπὶ Ἰλίῳ κληθῆναι Τρωικὸν καὶ οὐχ Ἑλληνικὸν ἐξενίκησεν, τοῦτον τῶν Μεσσηνίων τὸν πόλεμον Ῥιανός τε ἐν τοῖς ἔπεσιν ἐποίησεν ὁ Βηναῖος καὶ ὁ Πριηνεὺς Μύρων· λόγοι δὲ πεζοὶ Μύρωνός ἐστιν ἡ συγγραφή.
συνεχῶς μὲν δὴ τὰ πάντα ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐς τοῦ πολέμου τὴν τελευτὴν οὐδετέρῳ διήνυσται· μέρος δὲ ᾧ ἑκάτερος ἠρέσκετο, ὁ μὲν τῆς τε Ἀμφείας τὴν ἅλωσιν καὶ τὰ ἐφεξῆς συνέθηκεν οὐ πρόσω τῆς Ἀριστοδήμου τελευτῆς, Ῥιανὸς δὲ τοῦδε μὲν τοῦ πρώτου τῶν πολέμων οὐδὲ ἥψατο ἀρχήν· ὁπόσα δὲ χρόνῳ συνέβη τοῖς Μεσσηνίοις ἀποστᾶσιν ἀπὸ Λακεδαιμονίων, ὁ δὲ καὶ ταῦτα μὲν οὐ τὰ πάντα ἔγραψε, τῆς μάχης δὲ τὰ ὕστερα ἣν ἐμαχέσαντο ἐπὶ τῇ τάφρῳ τῇ καλουμένῃ Μεγάλῃ.
ἄνδρα οὖν Μεσσήνιον—τούτου γὰρ δὴ ἕνεκα τὸν πάντα ἐποιησάμην Ῥιανοῦ καὶ Μύρωνος λόγον—Ἀριστομένην, ὃς καὶ πρῶτος καὶ μάλιστα τὸ Μεσσήνης ὄνομα ἐς ἀξίωμα προήγαγε, τοῦτον τὸν ἄνδρα ἐπεισήγαγε μὲν ὁ Πριηνεὺς ἐς τὴν συγγραφήν, Ῥιανῷ δὲ ἐν τοῖς ἔπεσιν οὐδὲν Ἀριστομένης ἐστὶν ἀφανέστερος ἢ Ἀχιλλεὺς ἐν Ἰλιάδι Ὁμήρῳ. διάφορα οὖν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον εἰρηκότων, προσέσθαι μὲν τὸν ἕτερόν μοι τῶν λόγων καὶ οὐχ ἅμα ἀμφοτέρους ὑπελείπετο, Ῥιανὸς δέ μοι ποιῆσαι μᾶλλον ἐφαίνετο εἰκότα ἐς τὴν Ἀριστομένους ἡλικίαν·
Μύρωνα δὲ ἐπί τε ἄλλοις καταμαθεῖν ἔστιν οὐ προορώμενον εἰ ψευδῆ τε καὶ οὐ πιθανὰ δόξει λέγειν καὶ οὐχ ἥκιστα ἐν τῇδε τῇ Μεσσηνίᾳ συγγραφῇ. πεποίηκε γὰρ ὡς ἀποκτείνειε Θεόπομπον τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων τὸν βασιλέα Ἀριστομένης ὀλίγον πρὸ τῆς Ἀριστοδήμου τελευτῆς· Θεόπομπον δὲ οὔτε μάχης γινομένης οὔτε ἄλλως προαποθανόντα ἴσμεν πρὶν ἢ διαπολεμηθῆναι τὸν πόλεμον.
οὗτος δὲ ὁ Θεόπομπος· ἦν καὶ ὁ πέρας ἐπιθεὶς τῷ πολέμῳ· μαρτυρεῖ δέ μοι καὶ τὰ ἐλεγεῖα τῶν Τυρταίου λέγοντα ἡμετέρῳ βασιλῆι θεοῖσι φίλῳ Θεοπόμπῳ, / ὃν διὰ Μεσσήνην εἵλομεν εὐρύχορον. / ὁ τοίνυν Ἀριστομένης δόξῃ γε ἐμῇ γέγονεν ἐπὶ τοῦ πολέμου τοῦ ὑστέρου· καὶ τὰ ἐς αὐτόν, ἐπειδὰν ἐς τοῦτο ὁ λόγος ἀφίκηται, τηνικαῦτα ἐπέξειμι.
οἱ δὲ Μεσσήνιοι τότε, ὡς τὰ περὶ τὴν Ἄμφειαν ἤκουον παρʼ αὐτῶν τῶν ἀποσωθέντων ἐκ τῆς ἁλώσεως, συνελέγοντο ἐς Στενύκληρον ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων. ἀθροισθέντος δὲ ἐς ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ δήμου καὶ ἄλλοι τῶν ἐν τέλει καὶ τελευταῖος ὁ βασιλεὺς παρεκελεύετο μήτε τῆς Ἀμφείας καταπεπλῆχθαι τὴν πόρθησιν, ὡς τὸν πάντα ἤδη κεκριμένον διʼ αὐτῆς πόλεμον, μήτε ὡς τῆς σφετέρας κρείσσονα τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων δεδοικέναι τὴν παρασκευήν· μελέτην μὲν γὰρ ἐκείνοις τῶν πολεμικῶν ἐκ χρόνου πλείονος, σφίσι δὲ εἶναι τήν τε ἀνάγκην ἰσχυροτέραν ἀνδράσιν ἀγαθοῖς γίνεσθαι καὶ τὸ εὐμενέστερον ἔσεσθαι παρὰ τῶν θεῶν ἀμύνουσι τῇ οἰκείᾳ καὶ οὐκ ἀδικίας ἄρχουσιν.
Before I write the history of the war, and of all that God had laid up for both sides to do or suffer in the course of it, I wish to determine the date of a Messenian hero. This war which the Lacedaemonians and their allies waged on the Messenians and their supporters, received its name of Messenian, not from the aggressors, like the Median and Peloponnesian wars, but from the suffering people, just as the war at Ilium came to be known as the Trojan, and not the Greek war. The history of this war of the Messenians was composed by Rhianus of Bene in epic verse, and by Myron of Priene in prose. Neither of these writers composed a complete history of the war from beginning to end: each of them chose a special part. The narrative of Myron embraces the capture of Amphea and the subsequent events not later than the death of Aristodemus. Rhianus did not touch on this first war at all: what he did write was the history of the revolt of the Messenians from the Lacedaemonians, and not the whole of it, but only the events subsequent to the battle of the Great Trench, as the place was called.
The Messenian, for whose sake I have made all this mention of Rhianus and Myron, is Aristomenes, the first and greatest glory of the Messenian name. Myron has introduced him into his prose history, and in the verses of Rhianus he shines out like Achilles in the Iliad of Homer. In view of this wide discrepancy between my authorities, nothing was left for me but to accept the one narrative and reject the other. Of the two writers, Rhianus appeared to me to take the more probable view as to the date of Aristomenes. The writings of Myron, on the other hand, reveal an indifference to truth and probability which is best exemplified in his history of Messenia. For instance, he says that Theopompus, king of Lacedaemon, perished by the hand of Aristomenes shortly before the death of Aristodemus ; whereas we know that Theopompus did not die before the conclusion of the war, neither in battle nor in his bed. In fact, it was this very Theopompus who put an end to the war, as is proved by the elegiacs of Tyrtaeus :— To our God-beloved king Theopompus, Through whom we took spacious Messene. Aristomenes, then, in my opinion, was contemporary with the second Messenian war, and I will narrate his history in due course. 3. When the Messenians heard of the fate of Amphea from the fugitives who had escaped from the sack, they came from their different towns and met in Stenyclerus. And when the people were gathered in assembly, first the nobles, and last of all the king, implored them not to be cast down at the fall of Amphea, as if by that the issue of the war were decided, and not to dread the military power of their enemies, as if it were superior to their own. It was true, he said, that the Lacedaemonians had been longer disciplined in the art of war; but a stronger necessity was laid on the Messenians to quit themselves like men ; and the gods, he added, would surely look more kindly on blows struck, not in wanton aggression, but for home and country.
Cite This Text