she implored of her confessor, whose zeal made him still remain near her, to go down, as he might be in danger.58 She then said: "Whether I have done well or ill, my king is free from blame".

When the flames first touched her she shuddered, and asked for holy water; but as they gathered round her, she cried out, "My voices have not deceived me-my voices were from God". 59 From that time forth she uttered no word except the name of that Saviour which she had once inscribed upon her banner of victory, and with that holy name upon her lips she expired.

Her work was not the less accomplished. She said she had come to drive the English forth from France-and she did so. Their power continued to dwindle day by day. She said boldly on her trial that before seven years would pass, the English would receive a greater blow than the fall of Orleans; and in six years after that time King Charles entered Paris.

It would be a matter of interest, if space permitted, to trace in some degree the fate which her memory has undergone; how it was long obscured and defaced by forgetfulness and calumny; to say something of that drama which reflects so faithfully the passions of her national enemies, and which bears unworthily the name of Shakespeare; something also of that crowning disgrace to France that composition where profanity vies with ribald indecency, and which bears most worthily the name of Voltaire. That work was worthy of the eighteenth century and its patriarch; but the nineteenth has other thoughts. France has returned to do homage to her heroine. Those whose principles lead them to deny any miraculous intervention in human affairs, yet place her in the first rank amongst wondrous human creatures; and we may say that almost every inquirer who has combined high intelligence with faith, has come to avow himself a believer in the truth of her divine mission. Where the Church has not pronounced, each one is of course left to his private judgment upon the evidence. may, if it so seems to us, conclude that all this wonder-this undeniable history of an unlettered child, who in her obscure hamlet, not only declares herself commis

We

58 Dep. de Martin l'Advenu, t. iii. p. 169.

59

Usque ad finem vitæ suæ manutenuit et asseruit quod voces quas habuerat erant a Deo nec credebat per easdem voces fuisse de

ceptam.-Dep. de Martin l'Advenu, t. iii. p. 176.

sioned from on high to deliver her country, but from the
beginning, details with luminous precision the means by
which that deliverance was to be effected; who in the
accomplishment of her task, was enabled at once to recog-
nize those whom she had never seen, and to reveal
secrets known to no mortal; whose prophecies of future
events are attested by evidence which defies doubt; and
who in the command of armies showed the skill of a
captain of thirty years' experience that it is all explica-
ble upon natural principles of enthusiasm and delusion.
We may, if we are of the class that can repose contentedly
in words and abstractions instead of realities, name her
the impersonation of the soul of France, and even (her
the most devoted to her king and to his nobles!) the
herald of the triumph of democracy and of the rising of
the Gaul against the Frank and Norman.
We may
recur for an explanation to the modern miracles of mes-
merism and spiritualism. Or we may, upon the whole,
deem it the simpler solution to say, that in a great crisis
in which the whole future of the balanced commonwealth
of Christian Europe, and with it the peace and freedom
of the Church, were imperilled, the Arm which had of
old sent forth a shepherd boy for the salvation of Israel,
was not shortened, and once more raised up the weak
ones of this world to confound the strong. If Joan was
not, as she averred, sent from God to save her perishing
country, history has no such marvel and no such problem.
JOHN O'HAGAN.

Alcibiades un

ART. II.-The Genius of Alcibiades.

HAVING been led by the study of the period in

which Alcibiades lived, to the belief that modern derrated writers have scarcely done justice to the importance of the in mo. part played by that extraordinary man in Grecian, and

dern

times.

particularly in Athenian, history, we propose in this paper to endeavour to form as exact an appreciation as the existing sources of our information will permit, of the characteristics of his genius, and of the mode in which it developed and exhibited itself.

Niebuhr' has remarked that in the view of the ancients,

1 Lectures on Ancient History (Schmitz), ii. 98.

by an

Alcibiades was one of those demon-like beings who have His chapower to change the destinies of whole cities and nations. racter as Thucydides, that calmest and ablest of historians, who described was probably personally acquainted with Alcibiades, but cient at any rate must have often heard him speak in the pub- writers: 1. lic assembly, bears in many passages of his history ample by Thutestimony to the marvellous power of his character. Thus cydides ; in his sixth book (ch. 15), he distinctly attributes the downfall of Athens to the fact of their having withdrawn the command of their forces from the hands of Alcibiades. He says: "And although he had as a public man most admirably conducted the military operations, yet his personal habits and manner of life produced in them so much irritation and dislike, that they entrusted the command to others, and so in no long space of time brought ruin on the city". Again, the historian represents Alcibiades as the prime mover in the Sicilian expedition, which he undoubtedly regarded (ii. 65, vi. 31, 86, vii. 42) as no Quixotic enterprise, but as a scheme perfectly feasible; he also records the vigour and uniform success which characterized the early operations of the expedition during the brief period that they were presided over by Alcibiades. It is tolerably evident, therefore, that in the opinion of Thucydides that expedition also was ruined by the recall of Alcibiades, and might have succeeded, had he been allowed to conduct it. Aristophanes, in his play of the Frogs, which was exhibited in the year 406, that is shortly after Álcibiades had been superseded in the command of 2. by Aristhe fleet at Samos, makes Dionysus inquire of Eschylus tophanes. and Euripides, what is their opinion respecting Alcibiades. Euripides, whom it is throughout the object of the dramatist to exhibit in a contemptible light, replies in a pompous strain, that he "hates a citizen who is slow to serve his country, but quick to benefit himself", etc. Eschylus, on the other hand, on being appealed to, replies in two fine oracular lines, the purport of which is

"Twere best to breed no lion in your state;

But if you do, you should consult his humours.

Now as, in the amusing trial of skill between Eschylus and Euripides, which takes place before Dionysus, the former is always the conqueror, and at last is formally adjudged as such by the god, and released from Hades accordingly, nothing can be clearer than that Aristophanes,

Testi

tors:

whose soundness of judgment and practical sense hines
out in every page of his plays no less than his literary
ability, was himself of opinion, and wished to instil that
opinion into the Athenians, that, in spite of the heavy mis-
deeds of Alcibiades in times past, yet, for the sake of his
lion-like powers, it was their interest to "consult his
humours", and not, through their irritation at his personal
habits, thwart him and set him aside when disposed to
exert himself on their behalf. The like strain of thought
is indicated by the passage in the Aves (1. 145), where
Euelpides, in reply to the suggestion of the Hoopoo that
there is such a blessed city as he is looking for, one uncursed
by politics and law-suits, " by the Red Sea", replies-
διμοι, μηδαμῶς

ἡμῖν γε παρὰ θάλατταν, ἵν ̓ ανακύψεται
κλητῆρ ̓ ἄγουσ ̓ ἕωθεν ἡ Σαλαμινία.

The allusion here to the appearance of the Salaminian trireme at Catana, bearing the summons to Alcibiades to return and stand his trial, and the oblique censure cast on that proceeding by the dramatist, are too evident to require dwelling upon.

The judgment then of Aristophanes and Thucydides, both contemporaries—both eminently competent witnesses-may be quoted as testifying, first, to the extraordinary ability of Alcibiades as a statesman and as a general; secondly, to the folly of his countrymen in voluntarily depriving themselves of his services. We have drawn out the proof of this point at some length, because we shall require it presently when we review the judgments passed on Alcibiades by modern writers.

The testimony of the orators, whether for or against mony of Alcibiades, cannot pass for much. The most conscienthe ora - tious advocate, even in modern times, puts the worst or the best appearance on any given set of facts, according to the terms on which he has taken his brief, and it could not be expected that Athenian advocates would be found more scrupulous. The orators who mention Alcibiades of Lysias, are, Lysias, Isocrates, Andocides, and Demosthenes. Lysias eulogizes Alcibiades in the speech, "Pro bonis Aristophanis"; but in that against his son (In Alcibiadem, p. 142), he goes so far in the opposite direction as even to deny him more than average ability. Isocrates, in the of Iso- oration De Bigis, written for the younger Alcibiades as a reply to the oration of Lysias just mentioned, takes occasion to enumerate all the splendid exploits of his father.

crates,

mos

This he might do as an advocate merely; but in the Busiris (§5), an oration composed for the schools, not for the law-courts, Isocrates incidentally expresses an opinion to which more weight may be attached. In opposition to the sophist Polycrates he maintains (we quote the passage from Müller's Grecian Literature, p. 508), that the fact of Alcibiades having been educated by Socrates redounded to the latter's credit rather than to his disparagement, seeing that Alcibiades had "so far excelled all other men". The speech of Andocides against Alcibiades is, according to Müller, unquestionably spurious. Demosthenes, as of Demight be expected from his more commanding intellect, thenes. gives a more independent, and therefore more valuable, opinion. In the oration against Meidias (p. 561), he refers to the history of Alcibiades as of a man who had performed signal service to his country, as of a great general and a consummate orator. But when he goes on to say, that in spite of all this, the Athenians had justly discarded him on account of the intolerable ßpiç, or insolent pride, of his private character, we are not bound to regard this as his real opinion, but only as a statement accommodated to the requirements of his argument and the feelings of his hearers. He is charging Meidias with this unpardonable offence of üßpic, and the line of his reasoning is, " If your forefathers refused to pardon this crime in Alcibiades, counterbalanced as it was in him by eminent services to the state, much more should you refuse to pardon it in Meidias, who can plead no public services whatever". In the 'Epwτikos loyòs, p. 1414, among other instances of statesmen and generals benefited by the intercourse and instruction of philosophers, Demosthenes adduces the case of Alcibiades, who, though naturally far less disposed to virtue than Pericles, was yet materially improved by the teaching of Socrates.

The connection of Alcibiades with the illustrious man Testijust mentioned, will be discussed further on. Among the mony of other contemporary philosophers, Plato, though in no less Plato, than four of his dialogues Alcibiades holds a prominent place, does not appear to have felt much interest in him. Plato was a professional philosopher-a thinker par excellence;-extraordinary as was his intellect, he does not seem to have been a man of much character. Men of action-men formed to influence and rule their fellowshe did not perhaps entirely understand, and therefore could not adequately pourtray. We find in the dialogue