cruelty or wrong to individuals: it was founded on so specific
law; but it was based on the horror with which the Greeks of that
age regarded every man who made himself compulsory master of his
fellow-men, and exercised irresponsible dominion over them. The
fact of Miltiades having so ruled in the Chersonese was
undeniable; but the question which the Athenians, assembled in
judgment, must have tried, was, whether Miltiades, by becoming
tyrant of the Chersonese, deserved punishment as an Athenian
citizen. The eminent service that he had done the state in
conquering Lemnos and Imbros for it, pleaded strongly in his
favour. The people refused to convict him. He stood high in
public opinion; and when the coming invasion of the Persians was
known, the people wisely elected him one of their generals for
the year.

Two other men of signal eminence in history, though their renown
was achieved at a later period than that of Miltiades, were also
among the ten Athenian generals at Marathon. One was
Themistocles, the future founder of the Athenian navy and the
destined victor of Salamis: the other was Aristides, who
afterwards led the Athenian troops at Plataea, and whose
integrity and just popularity acquired for his country, when the
Persians had finally been repulsed, the advantageous pre-eminence
of being acknowledged by half of the Greeks as their impartial
leader and protector. It is not recorded what part either
Themistocles or Aristides took in the debate of the council of
war at Marathon. But from the character of Themistocles, his
boldness, and his intuitive genius for extemporizing the best
measures in every emergency (a quality which the greatest of
historians ascribes to him beyond all his contemporaries), we may