Concepts In Syngas Manufacture 1st Edition Jens

Rostrup-Nielsen - PDF Download (2025)

https://ebookultra.com/download/concepts-in-syngas-
manufacture-1st-edition-jens-rostrup-nielsen/

Visit ebookultra.com today to download the complete set of

ebooks or textbooks
We have selected some products that you may be interested in
Click the link to download now or visit ebookultra.com
for more options!.

Advances in Geophysics 57 1st Edition Lars Nielsen (Eds.)

https://ebookultra.com/download/advances-in-geophysics-57-1st-edition-
lars-nielsen-eds/

Information and Exponential Families In Statistical Theory

Barndorff-Nielsen

https://ebookultra.com/download/information-and-exponential-families-
in-statistical-theory-barndorff-nielsen/

Stages of Deployment of Syngas Cleaning Technologies 1st

Edition Filomena Pinto

https://ebookultra.com/download/stages-of-deployment-of-syngas-
cleaning-technologies-1st-edition-filomena-pinto/

Ground Wars Personalized Communication in Political

Campaigns Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

https://ebookultra.com/download/ground-wars-personalized-
communication-in-political-campaigns-rasmus-kleis-nielsen/
Atlas of Human Anatomy 1st Edition Mark Nielsen

https://ebookultra.com/download/atlas-of-human-anatomy-1st-edition-
mark-nielsen/

Entrepreneurship in Theory and Practice Paradoxes in Play

Second Edition Suna Lowe Nielsen

https://ebookultra.com/download/entrepreneurship-in-theory-and-
practice-paradoxes-in-play-second-edition-suna-lowe-nielsen/

Visions of World Community 1st Edition Jens Bartelson

https://ebookultra.com/download/visions-of-world-community-1st-
edition-jens-bartelson/

Entrepreneurship in Theory and Practice Paradoxes in Play

First Edition Suna Løwe Nielsen

https://ebookultra.com/download/entrepreneurship-in-theory-and-
practice-paradoxes-in-play-first-edition-suna-lowe-nielsen/

A dictionary of globalization 1st Edition Jens-Uwe

Wunderlich

https://ebookultra.com/download/a-dictionary-of-globalization-1st-
edition-jens-uwe-wunderlich/
Concepts In Syngas Manufacture 1st Edition Jens
Rostrup-Nielsen Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Jens Rostrup-Nielsen, Lars J. Christiansen
ISBN(s): 9781848165670, 1848165676
Edition: 1
File Details: PDF, 10.49 MB
Year: 2011
Language: english
 Concepts in
Syngas Manufacture

P717hc.9781848165670-tp.indd 1 6/13/11 3:37 PM

 CATALYTIC SCIENCE SERIES

Series Editor: Graham J. Hutchings (Cardiff University)

Published

Vol. 1 Environmental Catalysis

edited by F. J. J. G. Janssen and R. A. van Santen

Vol. 2 Catalysis by Ceria and Related Materials

edited by A. Trovarelli

Vol. 3 Zeolites for Cleaner Technologies

edited by M. Guisnet and J.-P. Gilson

Vol. 4 Isotopes in Heterogeneous Catalysis

edited by Justin S. J. Hargreaves, S. D. Jackson and G. Webb

Vol. 5 Supported Metals in Catalysis

edited by J. A. Anderson and M. F. García

Vol. 6 Catalysis by Gold

edited by G. C. Bond, C. Louis and D. T. Thompson

Vol. 7 Combinatorial Development of Solid Catalytic Materials:

Design of High-Throughput Experiments, Data Analysis,
Data Mining
edited by M. Baerns and M. HoleÁ a

Vol. 8 Petrochemical Economics: Technology Selection in a Carbon Constrained World

by D. Seddon

Vol. 9 Deactivation and Regeneration of Zeolite Catalysts

edited by M. Guisnet and F. R. Ribeiro

Vol. 10 Concepts in Syngas Manufacture

by J. Rostrup-Nielsen and L. J. Christiansen

Jihan - Concepts of Syngas.pmd 1 6/27/2011, 12:11 PM

 CATALYTIC SCIENCE SERIES — VOL. 10
Series Editor: Graham J. Hutchings

Concepts in
Syngas Manufacture

Jens Rostrup-Nielsen
Lars J. Christiansen
Haldor Topsoe A/S, Denmark

Imperial College Press

ICP

P717hc.9781848165670-tp.indd 2 6/13/11 3:37 PM

 Published by
Imperial College Press
57 Shelton Street
Covent Garden
London WC2H 9HE

Distributed by
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
5 Toh Tuck Link, Singapore 596224
USA office: 27 Warren Street, Suite 401-402, Hackensack, NJ 07601
UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

CONCEPTS IN SYNGAS MANUFACTURE

Catalytic Science Series — Vol. 10
Copyright © 2011 by Imperial College Press
All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the Publisher.

For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright Clearance
Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to photocopy is
not required from the publisher.

ISBN-13 978-1-84816-567-0
ISBN-10 1-84816-567-6

Printed in Singapore.

Jihan - Concepts of Syngas.pmd 2 6/27/2011, 12:11 PM

 Preface

“...a thin film of carbonaceous matter destroys the igniting power of platinum, and a
slight coating of sulphuret deprives palladium of this property...”
Davy Humphrey (1817) [141]

The aim of this book is twofold as reflected by the two parts of the book.
Part One deals with a broad introduction to the routes to synthesis gas
and to its applications. As the synthesis gas technologies involve big
exchanges of energy, this part includes a description of thermodynamic
methods necessary for process analysis and optimisation. Part Two deals
with an in-depth analysis of the steam reforming process which is the
mostly applied method for the manufacture of synthesis gas. The
reforming process is a complex coupling of catalysis and heat transfer.
Therefore this part describes the modelling of the process and an analysis
of the secondary phenomena dominating the catalytic reactions. The
book ends with a summary of the science of the steam reforming
reaction. In this way the procedure has been “peeling the onion”, starting
with the general aspects of the subject and approaching the scientific
understanding.
The development of the synthesis gas technologies is not a result of a
linear process starting with fundamental research. It is an example of
parallel efforts in industry and academia characterised by fruitful
interaction. It is the hope that the book may serve as a link between the
scientist in the research laboratory and the operator of the industrial
plant, as did a previous treatise, “Catalytic Steam Reforming”, published
in 1984 [389].
The authors have worked on the subject for a number of decades. We
have had the privilege to work with a multiple approach. In parallel to
the development work in the laboratory, at pilot units and industrial
plants we have been engaged in fundamental and explorative research
(JRN) and reactor modelling (LJC).

v
vi Concepts in Syngas Manufacture

Professor Graham Hutchings encouraged us to contribute this book to

Catalysis Science Series published by Imperial College Press. JRN
acknowledges his contact with British catalysis groups as having started
by reading Griffith and Marsh, Contact Catalysis [215], continued by
discussions with the group at Solihull in the 1960s, and carried further by
the activities at Imperial College via his friend David Trimm. This gave
JRN the pleasure to become acquainted with “competitors” from ICI.
We thank the Haldor Topsøe company for permission to publish the
book and we are thankful for the support from our colleagues. In
particular we give thanks for valuable input from Kim Aasberg-Petersen,
Jens Sehested, John Bøgild Hansen and Mette Stenseng. Professor Jens
Nørskov (DTU, Lyngby) has advised on the scientific aspects and
Professor Bryan Haynes (Univ. of Sydney) on heat transfer problems in
microreactors. Ms Susanne Mainz, Ms Birthe Bruun Nielsen, Ms Sussie
Nygaard, and Ms Birgit Rossil showed great patience in preparing the
manuscript.

Jens Rostrup-Nielsen and Lars J. Christiansen

Lyngby, Denmark, October 2010
 Contents

Preface .................................................................................................................. v
Part I Basic Principles
1 Routes to Syngas ......................................................................................... 3
1.1 General trends.................................................................................... 3
1.1.1 Towards focus and sustainability ............................................. 3
1.1.2 Direct or indirect conversion.................................................. 10
1.2 Manufacture by steam reforming of hydrocarbons.......................... 14
1.2.1 Reactions and thermodynamics ............................................. 14
1.2.2 Product gas composition ........................................................ 26
1.2.3 Thermodynamics of higher hydrocarbons ............................. 30
1.2.4 The tubular reformer .............................................................. 31
1.2.5 Carbon formation. Higher hydrocarbons ............................... 34
1.2.6 Non-tubular reforming ........................................................... 36
1.3 Other manufacture routes ................................................................ 38
1.3.1 Partial oxidation ..................................................................... 38
1.3.2 Autothermal reforming .......................................................... 41
1.3.3 Catalytic partial oxidation ...................................................... 43
1.3.4 Air-blown technologies and membranes................................ 48
1.3.5 Choice of technology ............................................................. 49
1.4 Other feedstocks .............................................................................. 51
1.4.1 Alcohols, oxygenates ............................................................. 51
1.4.2 Coal, gasification ................................................................... 55
1.4.3 Biomass.................................................................................. 63
1.5 Gas treatment................................................................................... 64
1.5.1 Purification ............................................................................ 64
1.5.2 Water gas shift ....................................................................... 67
1.5.3 Acid gas removal ................................................................... 70
2 Syngas Applications.................................................................................. 73
2.1 Thermodynamic framework for syngas processes........................... 73
2.1.1 Syngas properties ................................................................... 74
2.1.2 Synthesis process properties .................................................. 79
2.1.3 Process analysis ..................................................................... 80
2.2 Hydrogen ......................................................................................... 85
2.2.1 Routes to hydrogen ................................................................ 85
2.2.2 Hydrogen by steam reforming of hydrocarbons .................... 87

vii
viii Concepts in Syngas Manufacture

2.2.3 The steam export problem ..................................................... 92

2.2.4 Membrane reforming ............................................................. 94
2.2.5 Hydrogen via catalytic partial oxidation (CPO)..................... 95
2.3 Fuel cells ......................................................................................... 96
2.3.1 Fuel processing system .......................................................... 96
2.3.2 Internal reforming .................................................................. 99
2.3.3 Process schemes for SOFC .................................................. 104
2.4 CO rich gases ................................................................................ 105
2.4.1 Town gas .............................................................................. 105
2.4.2 Oxogas ................................................................................. 106
2.4.3 Reducing gas ........................................................................ 110
2.5 Ammonia ....................................................................................... 112
2.6 Methanol and synfuels................................................................... 117
2.6.1 Methanol as intermediate ..................................................... 117
2.6.2 Methanol plant ..................................................................... 118
2.6.3 Methanol via gasification ..................................................... 123
2.6.4 Combined syntheses and co-production............................... 124
2.6.5 Fischer–Tropsch synthesis ................................................... 127
2.6.6 SNG ..................................................................................... 134
2.7 Chemical recuperation ................................................................... 138
Part II Steam Reforming Technology
3 Technology of Steam Reforming ............................................................ 143
3.1 Early developments ....................................................................... 143
3.2 Steam reforming reactors .............................................................. 146
3.2.1 Role of catalyst .................................................................... 146
3.2.2 The tubular reformer ............................................................ 149
3.2.3 Scale-up of steam reforming technology ............................. 153
3.2.4 Plant measurements ............................................................. 154
3.2.5 Reformer temperature measurements .................................. 157
3.3 Modelling of steam reforming reactors ......................................... 159
3.3.1 Two-dimensional reactor model .......................................... 162
3.3.2 Heat transfer in the two-dimensional model ........................ 168
3.3.3 Heat transfer parameters in syngas units.............................. 171
3.3.4 Pressure drop........................................................................ 176
3.3.5 Convective reformers ........................................................... 178
3.3.6 Tubular reformer furnace chamber ...................................... 181
3.3.7 Tubular reforming limits of operation ................................. 187
3.3.8 Micro-scale steam reforming reactors.................................. 189
3.4 Modelling of the catalyst particle .................................................. 191
3.4.1 Catalyst particle model ........................................................ 192
3.4.2 Effective diffusion coefficients ............................................ 195
 Contents ix

3.4.3 Simulation of a hydrogen plant reformer ............................. 197

3.5 Reaction kinetics ........................................................................... 199
3.5.1 Industrial rates and the scale-down problem ........................ 199
3.5.2 Intrinsic kinetics. Steam reforming of methane ................... 204
3.5.3 Steam reforming of higher hydrocarbons ............................ 210
3.5.4 CO2 reforming...................................................................... 212
4 Catalyst Properties and Activity ............................................................. 213
4.1 Catalyst structure and stability ...................................................... 213
4.1.1 Reactions with the support ................................................... 213
4.1.2 Activation and nickel surface area ....................................... 216
4.2 Nickel surface area ........................................................................ 219
4.2.1 Measurement of nickel surface area..................................... 219
4.2.2 Nickel surface area and catalyst preparation ........................ 224
4.2.3 Sintering ............................................................................... 224
4.3 Catalyst activity ............................................................................. 227
4.3.1 Group VIII metals ................................................................ 227
4.3.2 Non-metal catalysts.............................................................. 228
4.3.3 Thermal reactions – catalytic steam cracking ...................... 230
5 Carbon and Sulphur ................................................................................ 233
5.1 Secondary phenomena ................................................................... 233
5.2 Carbon formation .......................................................................... 233
5.2.1 Routes to carbon .................................................................. 233
5.2.2 Carbon from reversible reactions ......................................... 241
5.2.3 Principle of equilibrated gas ................................................ 247
5.2.4 Principle of actual gas and steady-state equilibrium ............ 252
5.3 Steam reforming of higher hydrocarbons ...................................... 257
5.3.1 Whisker carbon in tubular reformer ..................................... 257
5.3.2 Catalyst promotion ............................................................... 260
5.3.3 “Gum formation” in prereformers........................................ 264
5.3.4 Carbon from pyrolysis ......................................................... 270
5.3.5 Regeneration of coked catalyst ............................................ 273
5.4 Sulphur poisoning of reforming reactions ..................................... 275
5.4.1 Chemisorption of hydrogen sulphide ................................... 275
5.4.2 Chemisorption equilibrium .................................................. 277
5.4.3 Dynamics of sulphur poisoning ........................................... 281
5.4.4 Regeneration for sulphur...................................................... 282
5.4.5 Impact of sulphur on reforming reactions ............................ 285
5.5 Sulphur passivated reforming ........................................................ 288
5.6 Other poisons................................................................................. 293
6 Catalysis of Steam Reforming ................................................................ 295
6.1 Historical perspective .................................................................... 295
6.2 The role of step sites ...................................................................... 298
x Concepts in Syngas Manufacture

6.3 Geometric or electronic effects...................................................... 305

6.4 Metal activity. Micro-kinetics ....................................................... 307
6.5 The parallel approach .................................................................... 311
Appendix 1 Enthalpy of formation ................................................................... 313
Appendix 2 Chemical equilibrium constants .................................................... 317
Notation and Abbreviations .............................................................................. 323
References ........................................................................................................ 331
Author index ..................................................................................................... 357
Subject index .................................................................................................... 369
 Part I
Basic Principles

Sketch by Haldor Topsøe, 20 Dec. 1989

This page intentionally left blank
1 Routes to Syngas

1.1 General trends

1.1.1 Towards focus and sustainability

Synthesis gas (syngas) is a mixture of hydrogen, carbon monoxide and

carbon dioxide. It may also contain nitrogen as applied for the ammonia
synthesis. Syngas is a key intermediate in the chemical industry. It is
used in a number of highly selective syntheses of a wide range of
chemicals and fuels, and as a source of pure hydrogen and carbon
monoxide. Syngas is playing an increasing role in energy conversion
[418].
Synthesis gas can be produced from almost any carbon source
ranging from natural gas and oil products to coal and biomass by
oxidation with steam and oxygen. Hence it represents a key for creating
flexibility for the chemical industry and for the manufacture of synthetic
fuels (synfuels).

Figure 1.1 Conversion via syngas.

The conversion via syngas results in products plus heat (Figure 1.1).
In most plants, the heat is utilised for running the plant. As an alternative,
the heat may be exported, but that is not always necessary.
The present use of syngas is primarily for the manufacture of
ammonia (in 2006, 124 million tonnes per year) and of methanol (in
2005, 33 million tonnes per year), followed by the use of pure hydrogen
for hydrotreating in refineries as shown in Table 1.1.
The main commodity products based on natural gas are shown in
Table 1.1 [420]. It is evident that the chemical conversion of natural gas

3
4 Concepts in Syngas Manufacture

(approximately 7 109 GJ/y) is marginal to the total natural gas production

(3.07 1012 Nm3/y [78] or 1.17 1011 GJ/y assuming a lower heating value
(LHV) equal to 38 MJ/Nm3). Recent trends in the use of syngas are
dominated by the conversion of inexpensive remote natural gas into
liquid fuels (“gas to liquids” or “GTL”) and by a possible role in a future
“hydrogen economy” mainly associated with the use of fuel cells. These
trends imply, on the one hand, the scale-up to large-scale GTL plants
(more than 500,000 Nm3 syngas/h) and, on the other hand, the scale-
down to small, compact syngas units for fuel cells (5–100 Nm3 syngas or
H2/h). These forecasts create new challenges for the technology and for
the catalysis.

Table 1.1 Main chemical products based on natural gas.

Yearly Energy Thermal LHV Efficiency

Product prod. consumpt. Practical (%) Ideal CO2 Main technology
(mil. t/y) (GJ/t) (%) (t/t)
Ammonia 124 29 65 89 16a Syngas/synthesis
Ethylene 75 15b 62 93 0.65 Steam cracking C2H6
Propylene 53 - - Steam cracking C2H6
Methanol 32 28 72 84 0.28 Syngas/synthesis
Hydrogen 20 12.6 84c 92 0.9 Steam reforming
Synfuels 18d 67 60 78 1.18 Syngas/synthesis
a) incl. CO2 converted into urea
b) data kindly provided by F. Dautzenberg, ABB Lummus, 2005
c) CH4 used for reaction heat; no steam export
d) excl. 3 million tonnes per year under construction

The data in Table 1.1 show that the practical efficiencies for natural
gas conversion into products are approximately 80% of the ideal values
expressed as:
LHV product / mol
ideal  (1.1)
LHV methane / mol

For endothermic reactions (ethylene, hydrogen), the LHV of the fuel

providing the reaction heat should be added to the nominator.
The world energy production is dominated by fossil fuels as the main
energy source. It amounted to 88% in 2007 with oil responsible for 37%
 Routes to Syngas 5

[78]. The energy consumption is growing fast in Asia, and China has
become the world’s second largest consumer of oil, after the USA. The
proved reserves of oil are concentrated in the Middle East (61%) and
those of natural gas are also in the Middle East (41%), followed by
Russia (23%) [78]. Coal is more evenly distributed between the
continents.
Apart from the large reserves (Middle East, Russia), natural gas is
present as associated gas in oil fields. However, as many fields are far
from the marketplace and often off-shore, the gas there is called remote
gas or stranded gas [102]. Part of the associated gas is reinjected to
enhance the oil recovery, but unfortunately still a significant fraction is
flared for convenience. The flared gas amounts to close to 5% of the total
natural gas production (corresponding to about 1% of total world CO2
production from fossil fuels) [263] [420].
So far, the proven reserves for oil have followed the increase in
production as expressed by the reserves/production ratio (R/P ratio)
staying at about 40 for oil over the last 20 years; however, at a steadily
increasing cost of exploration and production. A big fraction of the
reserves is present as oil sand (tar sand) and other non-conventional
sources under active development [78]. This means that at the present
world production, the oil reserves known today will be used up within
about 40 years. This figure should be considered with care. It does not
include reserves still to be found and it does not include the changes in
consumption (for instance the growth in Asia). Furthermore, the R/P
ratio for oil varies from region to region, being above 80 in the Middle
East and below 20 in North America.
The R/P ratio (2007) for natural gas is about 60 and 122 for coal [78].
The total R/P for fossil fuels (based on oil equivalent) is less than 100
years. These figures emphasise the need for flexibility in the energy
network and the need for alternative fuels. Oil is the most versatile of the
fossil fuels with high energy density and it is easily transported.
The power industry is very flexible to feedstocks and it is feasible to
transport coal over long distances to big centralised power plants close to
deep water harbours. Natural gas is transported to the marketplace in
pipelines over still longer distances or as liquified natural gas (LNG).
6 Concepts in Syngas Manufacture

The automotive sector represents a special challenge as the energy

conversion is strongly decentralised. So far oil-derived products have
been the solution, but in view of the limited reserves of oil, a number of
alternative fuels are being considered, such as liquefied petroleum gas
(LPG), natural gas, methanol, dimethylether (DME), ethanol, biodiesel,
synfuels and hydrogen. Biofuels represent a “sustainable” response to
liquid fuels. It may be based on ethanol and biodiesel derived from
conventional agricultural products or from synfuels via gasification of
biomass. The alternative fuels may be blended with conventional fuels or
used directly in internal combustion engines (ICE) or fuel cells. In
Western Europe alternative fuels may amount to 20% of energy sources
by 2020.
Globalisation has caused companies to concentrate on core business
and critical mass. It has resulted in a restructure of the chemical industry
into two types of focused companies [190]: the molecule suppliers
(commodities and fine chemicals) and the problem solvers (functional
chemicals like additives and pharmaceuticals). Each type has its own
characteristics as reflected by the role of the catalyst [418].
The most important parameter for large-volume chemicals is
production costs (variable and fixed costs). The variable costs are related
to the feed costs, the use of energy, process selectivity and environmental
costs.
Four trends have characterised plants for commodity chemicals:

 Location of cheap raw materials;

 Economy of scale;
 More integrated plants; and
 CO2 footprint (tonnes CO2 per tonne product).

Plants are moved to locations where raw materials are cheap. As

illustrated in Figure 1.2, the ammonia production is hardly feasible at
natural gas prices typical for Europe and USA (3–4 USD/GJ with high
seasonal variations) [420]. As a result, new plants for commodity
chemicals are built at locations (Middle East, Trinidad, Nigeria, West
Australia…) with low natural gas prices (0.5–1 USD/GJ). It means that
 Routes to Syngas 7

the use of natural gas as feedstock may not be feasible where there is a
big market for natural gas as fuel.

Figure 1.2 Ammonia production costs [420]. Reproduced with the permission of
Springer.

Plants have become larger to take advantage of the economy of scale.

The economy of scale can be expressed by:
n
 capacity1 
Cost 1  Cost 2  
 (1.2)
 capacity 2 
n typically varies between 0.6–0.9.
The economy of scale means choice of different technologies as they
may be characterised by different values of n.
Today, ammonia plants are built with capacities up to more than 3000
metric tons per day (MTPD) and methanol plants are being considered at
capacities of 10000 MTPD. This corresponds to the size of synthetic fuel
plants based on FT synthesis (35,000 bpd). At the same time, as plants
become bigger, there is a trend to minituarise chemical process plants
and take advantage of mass production, the economy of numbers
competing with the economy of scale. This is one of the key issues in the
“hydrogen economy” and the application of fuel cells. Micro-structured
8 Concepts in Syngas Manufacture

process equipment components such as heat exchangers, and new reactor

concepts are becoming available. Plants have also become more
integrated to minimise energy consumption.
It can be shown that the plant costs for a variety of processes correlate
with the energy transfer (heat transfer, compression) within the process
scheme [289]. As an example, the energy consumption of ammonia
production has decreased over the last 50 years from about 40 GJ/t to
29 GJ/t corresponding to a thermal efficiency (LHV) of 65% or 73% of
the theoretical minimum [169] [420].
Commodity plants depend on steady improvement and sophistication
of the technology. Even small improvements of the process scheme may
show short payback times. On the other hand, the uncertainties
associated with new technology may easily outbalance the economic
advantage of a new process. Improvement of one process step might
easily result in less favourable performance of another process step. The
high degree of integration means that the weakest part of the chain may
determine the performance of the entire plant. As an example, there is a
need for more coke-resistant catalysts and often deactivation phenomena
determine the process layout and the optimum process conditions to be
applied [404]. It is evident that catalyst life, i.e. on-stream factor, is
crucial for large-scale commodity plants in contrast to batch-wise
manufacture of fine chemicals.
A few days’ production stop because of a catalyst failure may be
crucial for the plant economy. It means that secondary phenomena such
as catalyst deactivation are important issues. For large-scale operation,
economic arguments will limit the minimum space time yield to
approximately 0.1 tonne product/m3 at a typical catalyst life of 5 years
[289]. This corresponds to a catalyst consumption of less than 0.2 kg
cat/t product. For ammonia synthesis a typical figure is 0.03 kg cat/t
NH3.
These risks mean that it has become more expensive to develop new
process technology. New technology must be demonstrated to a larger
extent – not only the basic principles, but also the solutions to a series of
secondary problems [400] [418].
Many well-established processes are approaching their theoretically
achievable efficiency, selectivity, etc. (refer to Table 1.1), but new
 Routes to Syngas 9

challenges have been introduced by objectives for sustainable growth

formulated by society. This has not only led to the introduction of new
products, but also necessitated the development of new processes.
Environmental challenges represent major room for breakthroughs in the
catalytic process industry.
For any process scheme, it is essential at an early stage to establish
the overall mass balance and to estimate the ΔP as simply being the
difference between the price of products and the price of feedstocks
[418]. Hence, there has been a trend to develop processes using cheaper
raw materials. The gain in ΔP could, however, be lost by lower
selectivity or higher investments. Selectivity is crucial to achieving a
high ΔP. Low selectivity and conversion per pass result in low
concentrations in process streams and hence more expensive separation
systems.

Figure 1.3 Simplified mass balance.

It may be argued that energy efficiency is of less importance when

natural gas is cheap, but high energy efficiency means small feed pretreat
units and reduced requirements for utilities and hence less investments.
Moreover, high efficiency means less CO2 production. As illustrated
in Figure 1.3, the ΔP calculation should consider also the energy
Other documents randomly have
different content
private citizen, and would attend the public assembly along with the
rest; a hint which implied, plainly as well as reasonably, that Dion
also ought to lay down his power, now that the common enemy was
put down.[256] The surrender of Ortygia had produced strong
excitement among the Syracusans. They were impatient to demolish
the dangerous stronghold erected in that islet by the elder
Dionysius; they both hoped and expected, moreover, to see the
destruction of that splendid funeral monument which his son had
built in his honor, and the urn with its ashes cast out. Now of these
two measures, the first was one of pressing and undeniable
necessity, which Dion ought to have consummated without a
moment’s delay; the second was compliance with a popular
antipathy at that time natural, which would have served as an
evidence that the old despotism stood condemned. Yet Dion did
neither. It was Herakleides who censured him, and moved for the
demolition of the Dionysian Bastile; thus having the glory of
attaching his name to the measure eagerly performed by Timoleon
eleven years afterwards, the moment that he found himself master
of Syracuse. Not only Dion did not originate the overthrow of this
dangerous stronghold, but when Herakleides proposed it, he resisted
him and prevented it from being done.[257] We shall find the same
den serving for successive despots—preserved by Dion for them as
well as for himself, and only removed by the real liberator Timoleon.
Herakleides gained extraordinary popularity among the
Syracusans by his courageous and patriotic conduct. But Dion saw
plainly that he could not, consistently with his own designs, permit
such free opposition any longer. Many of his adherents, looking upon
Herakleides as one who ought not to have been spared on the
previous occasion, were ready to put him to death at any moment;
being restrained only by a special prohibition which Dion now
thought it time to remove. Accordingly, with his privity, they made
their way into the house of Herakleides, and slew him.[258]
This dark deed abolished all remaining hope of obtaining
Syracusan freedom from the hands of Dion, and stamped him as the
mere successor of the Dionysian despotism. It was in vain that he
attended the obsequies of Herakleides with his full military force,
excusing his well-known crime to the people, on the plea, that
Syracuse could never be at peace while two such rivals were both in
active political life. Under the circumstances of the case, the remark
was an insulting derision; though it might have been advanced with
pertinence as a reason for sending Herakleides away, at the moment
when he before spared him. Dion had now conferred upon his rival
the melancholy honor of dying as a martyr to Syracusan freedom;
and in that light he was bitterly mourned by the people. No man
after this murder could think himself secure. Having once employed
the soldiers as executioners of his own political antipathies, Dion
proceeded to lend himself more and more to their exigencies. He
provided for them pay and largesses, great in amount, first at the
cost of his opponents in the city, next at that of his friends, until at
length discontent became universal. Among the general body of the
citizens, Dion became detested as a tyrant, and the more detested
because he had presented himself as a liberator; while the soldiers
also were in great part disaffected to him.[259]
The spies and police of the Dionysian dynasty not having been
yet reëstablished, there was ample liberty at least of speech and
censure; so that Dion was soon furnished with full indications of the
sentiment entertained towards him. He became disquieted and
irritable at this change of public feeling;[260] angry with the people,
yet at the same time ashamed of himself. The murder of Herakleides
sat heavy on his soul. The same man whom he had spared before
when in the wrong, he had now slain when in the right. The maxims
of the Academy which had imparted to him so much self-satisfaction
in the former act, could hardly fail to occasion a proportionate
sickness of self-reproach in the latter. Dion was not a mere power-
seeker, nor prepared for all that endless apparatus of mistrustful
precaution, indispensable to a Grecian despot. When told that his life
was in danger, he replied that he would rather perish at once by the
hands of the first assassin, than live in perpetual diffidence, towards
friends as well as enemies.[261]
 One thus too good for a despot, and yet unfit for a popular
leader, could not remain long in the precarious position occupied by
Dion. His intimate friend, the Athenian Kallippus, seeing that the
man who could destroy him would become popular with the
Syracusans as well as with a large portion of the soldiery, formed a
conspiracy accordingly. He stood high in the confidence of Dion, had
been his companion during his exile at Athens, had accompanied
him to Sicily, and entered Syracuse by his side. But Plato, anxious for
the credit of the Academy, is careful to inform us, that this
inauspicious friendship arose, not out of fellowship in philosophy, but
out of common hospitalities, and especially common initiation in the
Eleusinian mysteries.[262] Brave and forward in battle, Kallippus
enjoyed much credit with the soldiery. He was conveniently placed
for tampering with them, and by a crafty stratagem, he even insured
the unconscious connivance of Dion himself. Having learnt that plots
were formed against his life, Dion talked about them to Kallippus,
who offered himself to undertake the part of spy, and by simulated
partnership to detect as well as to betray the conspirators. Under
this confidence, Kallippus had full licence for carrying on his intrigues
unimpeded, since Dion disregarded the many warnings which
reached him.[263] Among the rumors raised out of Dion’s new
position, and industriously circulated by Kallippus—one was, that he
was about to call back Apollokrates, son of Dionysius, as his partner
and successor to the despotism—as a substitute for the youthful son
who had recently perished. By these and other reports, Dion became
more and more discredited, while Kallippus secretly organized a
wider circle of adherents. His plot however did not escape the
penetration of Aristomachê and Aretê; who having, first addressed
unavailing hints to Dion, at last took upon them to question Kallippus
himself. The latter not only denied the charge, but even confirmed
his denial, at their instance, by one of the most solemn and terrific
oaths recognized in Grecian religion; going into the sacred grove of
Demeter and Persephonê, touching the purple robe of the goddess,
and taking in his hand a lighted torch.[264]
 Inquiry being thus eluded, there came on presently the day of
the Koreia:—the festival of these very Two goddesses in whose name
and presence Kallippus had forsworn. This was the day which he had
fixed for execution. The strong points of defence in Syracuse were
confided beforehand to his principal adherents while his brother
Philostrates[265] kept a trireme manned in the harbor ready for flight
in case the scheme should miscarry. While Dion, taking no part in
the festival, remained at home, Kallippus caused his house to be
surrounded by confidential soldiers, and then sent into it a select
company of Zakynthians, unarmed, as if for the purpose of
addressing Dion on business. These men, young and of
distinguished muscular strength, being admitted into the house, put
aside or intimidated the slaves, none of whom manifested any zeal
or attachment. They then made their way up to Dion’s apartment,
and attempted to throw him down and strangle him. So strenuously
did he resist, however, that they found it impossible to kill him
without arms; which they were perplexed how to procure, being
afraid to open the doors, lest aid might be introduced against them.
At length one of their number descended to a back-door, and
procured from a Syracusan without, named Lykon, a short sword; of
the Laconian sort, and of peculiar workmanship. With this weapon
they put Dion to death.[266] They then seized Aristomachê and
Aretê, the sister and wife of Dion. These unfortunate women were
cast into prison, where they were long detained, and where the
latter was delivered of a posthumous son.
Thus perished Dion, having lived only about a year after his
expulsion of the Dionysian dynasty from Syracuse—but a year too
long for his own fame. Notwithstanding the events of those last
months, there is no doubt that he was a man essentially differing
from the class of Grecian despots: a man, not of aspirations purely
personal, nor thirsting merely for multitudes of submissive subjects
and a victorious army—but with large public-minded purposes
attached as coördinate to his own ambitious views. He wished to
perpetuate his name as the founder of a polity, cast in something of
the general features of Sparta; which, while it did not shock Hellenic
instincts, should reach farther than political institutions generally aim
to do, so as to remodel the sentiments and habits of the citizens, on
principles suited to philosophers like Plato. Brought up as Dion was
from childhood at the court of the elder Dionysius, unused to that
established legality, free speech, and habit of active citizenship, from
whence a large portion of Hellenic virtue flowed—the wonder is how
he acquired so much public conviction and true magnanimity of soul
—not how he missed acquiring more. The influence of Plato during
his youth stamped his mature character; but that influence (as Plato
himself tells us) found a rare predisposition in the pupil. Still, Dion
had no experience of the working of a free and popular government.
The atmosphere in which his youth was passed was that of an
energetic despotism; while the aspiration which he imbibed from
Plato was, to restrain and regularize that despotism, and to
administer to the people a certain dose of political liberty, yet
reserving to himself the task of settling how much was good for
them, and the power of preventing them from acquiring more.
How this project—the natural growth of Dion’s mind, for which
his tastes and capacities were suited—was violently thrust aside
through the alienated feelings of the younger Dionysius—has been
already recounted. The position of Dion was now completely altered.
He became a banished, ill-used man, stung with contemptuous
antipathy against Dionysius, and eager to put down his despotism
over Syracuse. Here were new motives apparently falling in with the
old project. But the conditions of the problem had altogether
changed. Dion could not overthrow Dionysius without “taking the
Syracusan people into partnership” (to use the phrase of
Herodotus[267] respecting the Athenian Kleisthenes)—without
promising them full freedom, as an inducement for their hearty
coöperation—without giving them arms, and awakening in them the
stirring impulses of Grecian citizenship, all the more violent because
they had been so long trodden down.[268] With these new allies he
knew not how to deal. He had no experience of a free and jealous
popular mind in persuasion, he was utterly unpractised: his manners
were haughty and displeasing. Moreover, his kindred with the
Dionysian family exposed him to antipathy from two different
quarters. Like the Duke of Orleans (Égalité) at the end of 1792, in
the first French Revolution—he was hated both by the royalists,
because, though related to the reigning dynasty, he had taken an
active part against it—and by sincere democrats, because they
suspected him of a design to put himself in its place. To Dion, such
coalition of antipathies was a serious hindrance; presenting a strong
basis of support for all his rivals, especially for the unscrupulous
Herakleides. The bad treatment which he underwent both from the
Syracusans and from Herakleides, during the time when the officers
of Dionysius still remained masters in Ortygia, has been already
related. Dion however behaved, though not always with prudence,
yet with so much generous energy against the common enemy, that
he put down his rival, and maintained his ascendency unshaken,
until the surrender of Ortygia.
That surrender brought his power to a maximum. It was the
turning-point and crisis of his life. A splendid opportunity was now
opened, of earning for himself fame and gratitude. He might have
attached his name to an act as sublime and impressive as any in
Grecian history, which, in an evil hour, he left to be performed in
after days by Timoleon—the razing of the Dionysian stronghold, and
the erection of courts of justice on its site. He might have taken the
lead in organizing, under the discussion and consent of the people, a
good and free government, which, more or less exempt from defect
as it might have been, would at least have satisfied them, and would
have spared Syracuse those ten years of suffering which intervened
until Timoleon came to make the possibility a fact. Dion might have
done all that Timoleon did—and might have done it more easily,
since he was less embarrassed both by the other towns in Sicily and
by the Carthaginians. Unfortunately he still thought himself strong
enough to resume his original project. In spite of the spirit, kindled
partly by himself, among the Syracusans—in spite of the
repugnance, already unequivocally manifested, on the mere
suspicion of his despotic designs—he fancied himself competent to
treat the Syracusans as a tame and passive herd; to carve out for
them just as much liberty as he thought right, and to require them
to be satisfied with it; nay, even worse, to defer giving them any
liberty at all, on the plea, or pretence, of full consultation with
advisers of his own choice.
Through this deplorable mistake, alike mischievous to Syracuse
and to himself, Dion made his government one of pure force. He
placed himself in a groove wherein he was fatally condemned to
move on from bad to worse, without possibility of amendment. He
had already made a martyr of Herakleides, and he would have been
compelled to make other martyrs besides, had his life continued. It
is fortunate for his reputation that his career was arrested so early,
before he had become bad enough to forfeit that sympathy and
esteem with which the philosopher Plato still mourns his death,
appeasing his own disappointment by throwing the blame of Dion’s
failure on every one but Dion himself.
 CHAPTER LXXXV.
SICILIAN AFFAIRS DOWN TO THE CLOSE OF THE
EXPEDITION OF TIMOLEON. B. C. 353-336.

The assassination of Dion, as recounted in my last chapter,

appears to have been skilfully planned and executed for the purpose
of its contriver, the Athenian Kallippus. Succeeding at once to the
command of the soldiers, among whom he had before been very
popular,—and to the mastery of Ortygia,—he was practically
supreme at Syracuse. We read in Cornelius Nepos, that after the
assassination of Dion there was deep public sorrow, and a strong
reaction in his favor, testified by splendid obsequies attended by the
mass of the population.[269] But this statement is difficult to believe;
not merely because Kallippus long remained undisturbed master, but
because he also threw into prison the female relatives of Dion—his
sister Aristomachê and his pregnant wife Aretê, avenging by such
act of malignity the false oath which he had so lately been
compelled to take, in order to satisfy their suspicions.[270] Aretê was
delivered of a son in the prison. It would seem that these unhappy
women were kept in confinement during all the time, more than a
year, that Kallippus remained master. On his being deposed, they
were released; when a Syracusan named Hiketas, a friend of the
deceased Dion, affected to take them under his protection. After a
short period of kind treatment, he put them on board a vessel to be
sent to Peloponnesus, but caused them to be slain on the voyage,
and their bodies to be sunk in the sea. To this cruel deed he is said
to have been instigated by the enemies of Dion; and the act shows
but too plainly how implacable those enemies were.[271]
 How Kallippus maintained himself in Syracuse—by what support,
or violences, or promises—and against what difficulties he had to
contend—we are not permitted to know. He seems at first to have
made promises of restoring liberty; and we are even told, that he
addressed a public letter to his country, the city of Athens;[272]
wherein he doubtless laid claim to the honors of tyrannicide;
representing himself as the liberator of Syracuse. How this was
received by the Athenian assembly, we are not informed. But to
Plato and the frequenters of the Academy, the news of Dion’s death
occasioned the most profound sorrow, as may still be read in the
philosopher’s letters.
Kallippus maintained himself for a year in full splendor and
dominion. Discontents had then grown up; and the friends of Dion—
or perhaps the enemies of Kallippus assuming that name—showed
themselves with force in Syracuse. However, Kallippus defeated
them, and forced them to take refuge in Leontini;[273] of which town
we presently find Hiketas despot. Encouraged probably by this
success, Kallippus committed many enormities, and made himself so
odious,[274] that the expelled Dionysian family began to conceive
hopes of recovering their dominion. He had gone forth from
Syracuse on an expedition against Katana; of which absence
Hipparinus took advantage to effect his entry into Syracuse, at the
head of a force sufficient, combined with popular discontent, to shut
him out of the city. Kallippus speedily returned, but was defeated by
Hipparinus, and compelled to content himself with the unprofitable
exchange of Katana in place of Syracuse.[275]
Hipparinus and Nysæus were the two sons of Dionysius the elder,
by Aristomachê, and were therefore nephews of Dion. Though
Hipparinus probably became master of Ortygia, the strongest portion
of Syracuse, yet it would appear that in the other portions of
Syracuse there were opposing parties who contested his rule; first,
the partisans of Dionysius the younger, and of his family—next, the
mass who desired to get rid of both the families, and to establish a
free popular constitution. Such is the state of facts which we gather
from the letters of Plato.[276] But we are too destitute of memorials
to make out anything distinct respecting the condition of Syracuse or
of Sicily between 353 B. C. and 344 B. C.—from the death of Dion to
the invitation sent to Corinth, which brought about the mission of
Timoleon. We are assured generally that it was a period of
intolerable conflicts, disorders, and suffering; that even the temples
and tombs were neglected;[277] that the people were everywhere
trampled down by despots and foreign mercenaries; that the
despots were frequently overthrown by violence or treachery, yet
only to be succeeded by others as bad or worse; that the
multiplication of foreign soldiers, seldom regularly paid, spread
pillage and violence everywhere.[278] The philosopher Plato—in a
letter written about a year or more after the death of Dion
(seemingly after the expulsion of Kallippus) and addressed to the
surviving relatives and friends of the latter—draws a lamentable
picture of the state both of Syracuse and Sicily. He goes so far as to
say, that under the distraction and desolation which prevailed, the
Hellenic race and language were likely to perish in the island, and
give place to the Punic or Oscan.[279] He adjures the contending
parties at Syracuse to avert this miserable issue by coming to a
compromise, and by constituting a moderate and popular
government,—yet with some rights reserved to the ruling families,
among whom he desires to see a fraternal partnership established,
tripartite in its character; including Dionysius the younger (now at
Lokri)—Hipparinus son of the elder Dionysius—and the son of Dion.
On the absolute necessity of such compromise and concord, to
preserve both people and despots from one common ruin, Plato
delivers the most pathetic admonitions. He recommends a triple
coördinate kingship, passing by hereditary transmission in the
families of the three persons just named; and including the
presidency of religious ceremonies with an ample measure of dignity
and veneration, but very little active political power. Advising that
impartial arbitrators, respected by all, should be invoked to settle
terms for the compromise, he earnestly implores each of the
combatants to acquiesce peaceably in their adjudication.[280]
 To Plato,—who saw before him the line double of Spartan kings,
the only hereditary kings in Greece,—the proposition of three
coördinate kingly families did not appear at all impracticable; nor
indeed was it so, considering the small extent of political power
allotted to them. But amidst the angry passions which then raged,
and the mass of evil which had been done and suffered on all sides,
it was not likely that any pacific arbitrator, of whatever position or
character, would find a hearing, or would be enabled to effect any
such salutary adjustment as had emanated from the Mantinean
Dêmônax at Kyrênê—between the discontented Kyreneans and the
dynasty of the Battiad princes.[281] Plato’s recommendation passed
unheeded. He died in 348-347 B. C., without seeing any mitigation of
those Sicilian calamities which saddened the last years of his long
life. On the contrary, the condition of Syracuse grew worse instead
of better. The younger Dionysius contrived to effect his return,
expelling Hipparinus and Nysæus from Ortygia, and establishing
himself there again as master. As he had a long train of past
humiliation to avenge, his rule was of that oppressive character
which the ancient proverb recognized as belonging to kings restored
from exile.[282]
Of all these princes descended from the elder Dionysius, not one
inherited the sobriety and temperance which had contributed so
much to his success. All of them are said to have been of drunken
and dissolute habits[283]—Dionysius the younger, and his son
Apollokrates, as well as Hipparinus and Nysæus. Hipparinus was
assassinated while in a fit of intoxication; so that Nysæus became
the representative of this family, until he was expelled from Ortygia
by the return of the younger Dionysius.
That prince, since his first expulsion from Syracuse, had chiefly
resided at Lokri in Italy, of which city his mother Doris was a native.
It has already been stated that the elder Dionysius had augmented
and nursed up Lokri by every means in his power, as an
appurtenance of his own dominion at Syracuse. He had added to its
territory all the southernmost peninsula of Italy (comprehended
within a line drawn from the Gulf of Terina to that of Skylletium),
once belonging to Rhegium, Kaulonia, and Hipponium. But though
the power of Lokri was thus increased, it had ceased to be a free
city, being converted into a dependency of the Dionysian family.[284]
As such, it became the residence of the second Dionysius, when he
could no longer maintain himself in Syracuse. We know little of what
he did; though we are told that he revived a portion of the
dismantled city of Rhegium under the name of Phœbia.[285] Rhegium
itself reappears shortly afterwards as a community under its own
name, and was probably reconstituted at the complete downfall of
the second Dionysius.
The season between 356-346 B. C., was one of great pressure and
suffering for all the Italiot Greeks, arising from the increased power
of the inland Lucanians and Bruttians. These Bruttians, who
occupied the southernmost Calabria, were a fraction detached from
the general body of Lucanians and self-emancipated; having
consisted chiefly of indigenous rural serfs in the mountain
communities, who threw off the sway of their Lucanian masters, and
formed an independent aggregate for themselves. These men,
especially in the energetic effort which marked their early
independence, were formidable enemies of the Greeks on the coast,
from Tarentum to the Sicilian strait; and more than a match even for
the Spartans and Epirots invited over by the Greeks as auxiliaries.
It appears that the second Dionysius, when he retired to Lokri
after the first loss of his power at Syracuse, soon found his rule
unacceptable and his person unpopular. He maintained himself,
seemingly from the beginning, by means of two distinct citadels in
the town, with a standing army under the command of the Spartan
Pharax, a man of profligacy and violence.[286] The conduct of
Dionysius became at last so odious, that nothing short of extreme
force could keep down the resentment of the citizens. We read that
he was in the habit of practising the most licentious outrage towards
the marriageable maidens of good family in Lokri. The detestation
thus raised against him was repressed by his superior force—not, we
may be sure, without numerous cruelties perpetrated against
individual persons who stood on their defence—until the moment
arrived when he and his son Apollokrates effected their second
return to Ortygia. To ensure so important an acquisition, Dionysius
diminished his military force at Lokri, where he at the same time left
his wife, his two daughters, and his youthful son. But after his
departure, the Lokrians rose in insurrection, overpowered the
reduced garrison, and took captive these unfortunate members of
his family. Upon their guiltless heads fell all the terrors of retaliation
for the enormities of the despot. It was in vain that both Dionysius
himself, and the Tarentines[287] supplicated permission to redeem
the captives at the highest ransom. In vain was Lokri besieged, and
its territory desolated. The Lokrians could neither be seduced by
bribes, nor deterred by threats, from satiating the full extremity of
vindictive fury. After multiplied cruelties and brutalities, the wife and
family of Dionysius were at length relieved from farther suffering by
being strangled.[288] With this revolting tragedy terminated the
inauspicious marital connection begun between the elder Dionysius
and the oligarchy of Lokri.
By the manner in which Dionysius exercised his power at Lokri,
we may judge how he would behave at Syracuse. The Syracusans
endured more evil than ever, without knowing where to look for
help. Hiketas the Syracusan (once the friend of Dion, ultimately the
murderer of the slain Dion’s widow and sister), had now established
himself as despot at Leontini. To him they turned as an auxiliary,
hoping thus to obtain force sufficient for the expulsion of Dionysius.
Hiketas gladly accepted the proposition, with full purpose of reaping
the reward of such expulsion, when achieved, for himself. Moreover,
a formidable cloud was now gathering from the side of Carthage.
What causes had rendered Carthage inactive for the last few years,
while Sicily was so weak and disunited—we do not know; but she
had now become once more aggressive, extending her alliances
among the despots of the island, and pouring in a large force and
fleet, so as to menace the independence both of Sicily and of
Southern Italy.[289] The appearance of this new enemy drove the
Syracusans to despair, and left them no hope of safety except in
assistance from Corinth. To that city they sent a pathetic and urgent
appeal, setting forth both the actual suffering and the approaching
peril from without. And such indeed was the peril, that even to a
calm observer, it might well seem as if the mournful prophecy of
Plato was on the point of receiving fulfilment—Hellenism as well as
freedom becoming extinct on the island.
To the invocation of Corinthian aid, Hiketas was a party; yet an
unwilling party. He had made up his mind that for his purpose, it was
better to join the Carthaginians, with whom he had already opened
negotiations—and to employ their forces, first in expelling Dionysius,
next in ruling Syracuse for himself. But these were schemes not to
be yet divulged: accordingly, Hiketas affected to concur in the
pressing entreaty sent by the Syracusans to Corinth, intending from
the beginning to frustrate its success.[290] He expected indeed that
the Corinthians would themselves decline compliance: for the
enterprise proposed to them was full of difficulty; they had neither
injury to avenge, nor profit to expect; while the force of sympathy,
doubtless not inconsiderable, with a suffering colony, would probably
be neutralized by the unsettled and degraded condition into which all
Central Greece was now rapidly sinking, under the ambitious strides
of Philip of Macedon.
The Syracusan envoys reached Corinth at a favorable moment.
But it is melancholy to advert to the aggregate diminution of Grecian
power, as compared with the time when (seventy years before) their
forefathers had sent thither to solicit aid against the besieging
armament of Athens; a time when Athens, Sparta, and Syracuse
herself, were all in exuberant vigor as well as unimpaired freedom.
However, the Corinthians happened at this juncture to have their
hands as well as their minds tolerably free, so that the voice of
genuine affliction, transmitted from the most esteemed of all their
colonies, was heard with favor and sympathy. A decree was passed,
heartily and unanimously, to grant the aid solicited.[291]
 The next step was to choose a leader. But a leader was not easily
found. The enterprise presented little temptation, with danger and
difficulty abundant as well as certain. The hopeless discord of
Syracuse for years past, was well known to all the leading Corinthian
politicians or generals. Of all or most of these, the names were
successively put up by the archons; but all with one accord declined.
At length, while the archons hesitated whom to fix upon, an
unknown voice in the crowd pronounced the name of Timoleon, son
of Timodemus. The mover seemed prompted by divine inspiration;
[292] so little obvious was the choice, and so preëminently excellent
did it prove. Timoleon was named—without difficulty, and without
much intention of doing him honor—to a post which all the other
leading men declined.
Some points must be here noticed in the previous history of this
remarkable man. He belonged to an illustrious family in Corinth, and
was now of mature age—perhaps about fifty. He was distinguished
no less for his courage than for the gentleness of his disposition.
Little moved either by personal vanity or by ambition, he was
devoted in his patriotism, and unreserved in his hatred of despots as
well as of traitors.[293] The government of Corinth was, and always
had been, oligarchical; but it was a regular, constitutional, oligarchy;
while the Corinthian antipathy against despots was of old
standing[294]—hardly less strong than that of democratical Athens.
As a soldier in the ranks of Corinthian hoplites, the bravery of
Timoleon, and his submission to discipline, were alike remarkable.
These points of his character stood out the more forcibly from
contrast with his elder brother Timophanes; who possessed the
soldierlike merits of bravery and energetic enterprise, but combined
with them an unprincipled ambition, and an unscrupulous
prosecution of selfish advancement at all cost to others. The military
qualities of Timophanes, however, gained for him so much
popularity, that he was placed high as an officer in the Corinthian
service. Timoleon, animated with a full measure of brotherly
attachment, not only tried to screen his defects as well as to set off
his merits, but also incurred the greatest perils for the purpose of
saving his life. In a battle against the Argeians and Kleonæans,
Timophanes was commanding the cavalry, when his horse, being
wounded, threw him on the ground, very near to the enemy. The
remaining horsemen fled, leaving their commander to what seemed
certain destruction; but Timoleon, who was serving among the
hoplites, rushed singly forth from the ranks with his utmost speed,
and covered Timophanes with his shield, when the enemy were just
about to pierce him. He made head single-handed against them,
warding off numerous spears and darts, and successfully protected
his fallen brother until succor arrived; though at the cost of several
wounds to himself.[295]
This act of generous devotion raised great admiration towards
Timoleon. But it also procured sympathy for Timophanes, who less
deserved it. The Corinthians had recently incurred great risk of
seeing their city fall into the hands of their Athenian allies, who had
laid a plan to seize it, but were disappointed through timely notice
given at Corinth.[296] To arm the people being regarded as
dangerous to the existing oligarchy,[297] it was judged expedient to
equip a standing force of four hundred paid foreign soldiers, and
establish them as a permanent garrison in the strong and lofty
citadel. The command of this garrison, with the mastery of the fort,
was intrusted to Timophanes. A worse choice could not have been
made. The new commander—seconded not only by his regiment and
his strong position, but also by some violent partisans whom he took
into his pay and armed, among the poorer citizens—speedily stood
forth as despot, taking the whole government into his own hands.
He seized numbers of the chief citizens, probably all the members of
the oligarchical councils who resisted his orders, and put them to
death without even form of trial.[298] Now, when it was too late, the
Corinthians repented of the mistaken vote which had raised up a
new Periander among them. But to Timoleon, the crimes of his
brother occasioned an agony of shame and sorrow. He first went up
to the acropolis[299] to remonstrate with him; conjuring him
emphatically, by the most sacred motives public as well as private, to
renounce his disastrous projects. Timophanes repudiated the appeal
with contempt. Timoleon had now to choose between his brother
and his country. Again he went to the acropolis, accompanied by
Æschylus, brother of the wife of Timophanes—by the prophet
Orthagoras, his intimate friend—perhaps also by another friend
named Telekleides. Admitted into the presence of Timophanes, they
renewed their prayers and supplications; urging him even yet to
recede from his tyrannical courses. But all their pleading was without
effect. Timophanes first laughed them to scorn; presently, he
became exasperated, and would hear no more. Finding words
unavailing, they now drew their swords and put him to death.
Timoleon lent no hand in the deed, but stood a little way off, with
his face hidden, and in a flood of tears.[300]
With the life of Timophanes passed away the despotism which
had already begun its crushing influence upon the Corinthians. The
mercenary force was either dismissed, or placed in safe hands; the
acropolis became again part of a free city; the Corinthian
constitution was revived as before. In what manner this change was
accomplished, or with what measure of violence it was accompanied,
we are left in ignorance; for Plutarch tells us hardly anything except
what personally concerns Timoleon. We learn however that the
expressions of joy among the citizens, at the death of Timophanes
and the restoration of the constitution, were vehement and
universal. So strongly did this tide of sentiment run, as to carry
along with it, in appearance, even those who really regretted the
departed despotism. Afraid to say what they really felt about the
deed, these men gave only the more abundant utterance to their
hatred of the doer. Though it was good that Timophanes should be
killed (they said), yet that he should be killed by his brother, and his
brother-in-law, was a deed which tainted both the actors with
inexpiable guilt and abomination. The majority of the Corinthian
public, however, as well as the most distinguished citizens, took a
view completely opposite. They expressed the warmest admiration
as well for the doer as for the deed. They extolled the combination
of warm family affection with devoted magnanimity and patriotism,
each in its right place and properly balanced, which marked the
conduct of Timoleon. He had displayed his fraternal affection by
encountering the greatest perils in the battle, in order to preserve
the life of Timophanes. But when that brother, instead of an
innocent citizen, became the worst enemy of Corinth, Timoleon had
then obeyed the imperative call of patriotism, to the disregard not
less of his own comfort and interest than of fraternal affection.[301]
Such was the decided verdict pronounced by the majority—a
majority as well in value as in number—respecting the behavior of
Timoleon. In his mind, however, the general strain of encomium was
not sufficient to drown, or even to compensate, the language of
reproach, in itself so much more pungent, which emanated from the
minority. Among that minority too was found one person whose
single voice told with profound impression—his mother Demaristê,
mother also of the slain Timophanes. Demaristê not only thought of
her murdered son with the keenest maternal sorrow, but felt intense
horror and execration for the authors of the deed. She imprecated
curses on the head of Timoleon, refused even to see him again, and
shut her doors against his visits, in spite of earnest supplications.
There wanted nothing more to render Timoleon thoroughly
miserable, amidst the almost universal gratitude of Corinth. Of his
strong fraternal affection for Timophanes, his previous conduct
leaves no doubt. Such affection had to be overcome before he
accompanied his tyrannicidal friends to the acropolis, and doubtless
flowed back with extreme bitterness upon his soul, after the deed
was done. But when to this internal source of distress, was added
the sight of persons who shrank from contact with him as a
fratricide, together with the sting of the maternal Erinnys—he
became agonized even to distraction. Life was odious to him; he
refused for some time all food, and determined to starve himself to
death. Nothing but the pressing solicitude of friends prevented him
from executing the resolve. But no consoling voice could impart to
him spirit for the duties of public life. He fled the city and the haunts
of men, buried himself in solitude amidst his fields in the country,
and refrained from seeing or speaking to any one. For several years
he thus hid himself like a self-condemned criminal; and even when
time had somewhat mitigated the intensity of his anguish, he still
shunned every prominent position, performing nothing more than his
indispensable duties as a citizen. An interval of twenty years[302] had
now elapsed from the death of Timophanes, to the arrival of the
Syracusan application for aid. During all this time, Timoleon, in spite
of the sympathy and willingness of admiring fellow-citizens, had
never once chosen to undertake any important command or office.
At length the vox Dei is heard, unexpectedly, amidst the crowd;
dispelling the tormenting nightmare which had so long oppressed his
soul, and restoring him to healthy and honorable action.
There is no doubt that the conduct of Timoleon and Æschylus in
killing Timophanes was in the highest degree tutelary to Corinth.
The despot had already imbrued his hands in the blood of his
countrymen, and would have been condemned, by fatal necessity, to
go on from bad to worse, multiplying the number of victims, as a
condition of preserving his own power. To say that the deed ought
not to have been done by near relatives, was tantamount to saying,
that it ought not to have been done at all; for none but near
relatives could have obtained that easy access which enabled them
to effect it. And even Timoleon and Æschylus could not make the
attempt without the greatest hazard to themselves. Nothing was
more likely than that the death of Timophanes would be avenged on
the spot; nor are we told how they escaped such vengeance from
the soldiers at hand. It has been already stated that the
contemporary sentiment towards Timoleon was divided between
admiration of the heroic patriot, and abhorrence of the fratricide; yet
with a large preponderance on the side of admiration, especially in
the highest and best minds. In modern times the preponderance
would be in the opposite scale. The sentiment of duty towards family
covers a larger proportion of the field of morality, as compared with
obligations towards country, than it did in ancient times; while that
intense antipathy against a despot who overtops and overrides the
laws, regarding him as the worst of criminals—which stood in the
foreground of the ancient virtuous feeling—has now disappeared.
Usurpation of the supreme authority is regarded generally among
the European public as a crime, only where it displaces an
established king already in possession; where there is no king, the
successful usurper finds sympathy rather than censure: and few
readers would have been displeased with Timoleon, had he even
seconded his brother’s attempt. But in the view of Timoleon and of
his age generally, even neutrality appeared in the light of treason to
his country, when no other man but him could rescue her from the
despot. This sentiment is strikingly embodied in the comments of
Plutarch; who admires the fraternal tyrannicide, as an act of sublime
patriotism, and only complains that the internal emotions of
Timoleon were not on a level with the sublimity of the act; that the
great mental suffering which he endured afterwards, argued an
unworthy weakness of character; that the conviction of imperative
patriotic duty, having been once deliberately adopted, ought to have
steeled him against scruples, and preserved him from that after-
shame and repentance which spoiled half the glory of an heroic act.
The antithesis, between Plutarch and the modern European point of
view, is here pointed; though I think his criticism unwarranted.
There is no reason to presume that Timoleon ever felt ashamed and
repentant for having killed his brother. Placed in the mournful
condition of a man agitated by conflicting sentiments, and obeying
that which he deemed to carry the most sacred obligation, he of
necessity suffered from the violation of the other. Probably the
reflection that he had himself saved the life of Timophanes, only that
the latter might destroy the liberties of his country—contributed
materially to his ultimate resolution; a resolution, in which Æschylus,
another near relative, took even a larger share than he.
It was in this state of mind that Timoleon was called upon to take
the command of the auxiliaries for Syracuse. As soon as the vote
had passed, Telekleides addressed to him a few words, emphatically
exhorting him to strain every nerve, and to show what he was worth
—with this remarkable point in conclusion—“If you now come off
with success and glory, we shall pass for having slain a despot; if
you fail, we shall be held as fratricides.”[303]
He immediately commenced his preparation of ships and soldiers.
But the Corinthians, though they had resolved on the expedition,
were not prepared either to vote any considerable subsidy, or to
serve in large numbers as volunteers. The means of Timoleon were
so extremely limited, that he was unable to equip more than seven
triremes, to which the Korkyræans (animated by common sympathy
for Syracuse, as of old in the time of the despot Hippokrates[304])
added two more, and the Leukadians one. Nor could he muster
more than one thousand soldiers, reinforced afterwards on the
voyage to twelve hundred. A few of the principal Corinthians—
Eukleides, Telemachus and Neon, among them—accompanied him.
But the soldiers seem to have been chiefly miscellaneous
mercenaries,—some of whom had served under the Phokians in the
Sacred war (recently brought to a close), and had incurred so much
odium as partners in the spoliation of the Delphian temple, that they
were glad to take foreign service anywhere.[305]
Some enthusiasm was indeed required to determine volunteers in
an enterprise of which the formidable difficulties, and the doubtful
reward, were obvious from the beginning. But even before the
preparations were completed, news came which seemed to render it
all but hopeless. Hiketas sent a second mission, retracting all that he
said in the first, and desiring that no expedition might be sent from
Corinth. Not having received Corinthian aid in time (he said), he had
been compelled to enter into alliance with the Carthaginians, who
would not permit any Corinthian soldiers to set foot in Sicily. This
communication, greatly exasperating the Corinthians against
Hiketas, rendered them more hearty in votes to put him down. Yet
their zeal for active service, far from being increased, was probably
even abated by the aggravation of obstacles thus revealed. If
Timoleon even reached Sicily, he would find numberless enemies,
without a single friend of importance:—for without Hiketas, the
Syracusan people were almost helpless. But it now seemed
impossible that Timoleon with his small force could ever touch the
Sicilian shore, in the face of a numerous and active Carthaginian
fleet.[306]
While human circumstances thus seemed hostile, the gods held
out to Timoleon the most favorable signs and omens. Not only did
he receive an encouraging answer at Delphi, but while he was
actually in the temple, a fillet with intertwined wreaths and symbols
of victory fell from one of the statues upon his head. The priestesses
of Persephonê learnt from the goddess in a dream, that she was
about to sail with Timoleon for Sicily, her own favorite island.
Accordingly he caused a new special trireme to be fitted out, sacred
to the Two goddesses (Dêmêtêr and Persephonê) who were about to
accompany him. And when, after leaving Korkyra, the squadron
struck across for a night voyage to the Italian coast, this sacred
trireme was seen illumined by a blaze of light from heaven; while a
burning torch on high, similar to that which was usually carried in
the Eleusinian mysteries, ran along with the ship and guided the
pilot to the proper landing place at Metapontum. Such
manifestations of divine presence and encouragement, properly
certified and commented upon by the prophets, rendered the voyage
one of universal hopefulness to the armament.[307]
These hopes, however, were sadly damped, when after
disregarding a formal notice from a Carthaginian man-of-war, they
sailed down the coast of Italy and at last reached Rhegium. This city,
having been before partially revived under the name of Phœbia, by
the younger Dionysius, appears now as reconstituted under its old
name and with its full former autonomy, since the overthrow of his
rule at Lokri and in Italy generally. Twenty Carthaginian triremes,
double the force of Timoleon, were found at Rhegium awaiting his
arrival—with envoys from Hiketas aboard. These envoys came with
what they pretended to be good news. “Hiketas had recently gained
a capital victory over Dionysius, whom he had expelled from most
part of Syracuse, and was now blocking up in Ortygia; with hopes of
soon starving him out, by the aid of a Carthaginian fleet. The
common enemy being thus at the end of his resources, the war
could not be prolonged. Hiketas therefore trusted that Timoleon
would send back to Corinth his fleet and troops, now become
superfluous. If Timoleon would do this, he (Hiketas) would be
delighted to see him personally at Syracuse, and would gladly
consult him in the resettlement of that unhappy city. But he could
not admit the Corinthian armament into the island; moreover, even
had he been willing, the Carthaginians peremptorily forbade it, and
were prepared, in case of need, to repel it with their superior naval
force now in the strait.”[308]
The game which Hiketas was playing with the Carthaginians now
stood plainly revealed, to the vehement indignation of the
armament. Instead of being their friend, or even neutral, he was
nothing less than a pronounced enemy, emancipating Syracuse from
Dionysius only to divide it between himself and the Carthaginians.
Yet with all the ardor of the armament, it was impossible to cross
the strait in opposition to an enemy’s fleet of double force.
Accordingly Timoleon resorted to a stratagem, in which the leaders
and people of Rhegium, eagerly sympathizing with his projects of
Sicilian emancipation, coöperated. In an interview with the envoys of
Hiketas as well as with the Carthaginian commanders, he affected to
accept the conditions prescribed by Hiketas; admitting at once that it
was useless to stand out. But he at the same time reminded them,
that he had been intrusted with the command of the armament for
Sicilian purposes,—and that he should be a disgraced man, if he now
conducted it back without touching the island; except under the
pressure of some necessity not merely real, but demonstrable to all
and attested by unexceptionable witnesses. He therefore desired
them to appear, along with him, before the public assembly of
Rhegium, a neutral city and common friend of both parties. They
would then publicly repeat the communication which they had
already made to him, and they would enter into formal engagement
for the good treatment of the Syracusans, as soon as Dionysius
should be expelled. Such proceeding would make the people of
Rhegium witnesses on both points. They would testify on his
(Timoleon’s) behalf, when he came to defend himself at Corinth, that
he had turned his back only before invincible necessity, and that he
had exacted everything in his power in the way of guarantee for
Syracuse; they would testify also on behalf of the Syracusans, in
case the guarantee now given should be hereafter evaded.[309]
Neither the envoys of Hiketas, nor the Carthaginian commanders,
had any motive to decline what seemed to them an unmeaning
ceremony. Both of them accordingly attended, along with Timoleon,
before the public assembly of Rhegium formally convened. The gates
of the city were closed (a practice usual during the time of a public
assembly): the Carthaginian men-of-war lay as usual near at hand,
but in no state for immediate movement, and perhaps with many of
the crews ashore; since all chance of hostility seemed to be past.
What had been already communicated to Timoleon from Hiketas and
the Carthaginians, was now repeated in formal deposition before the
assembly; the envoys of Hiketas probably going into the case more
at length, with certain flourishes of speech prompted by their own
vanity. Timoleon stood by as an attentive listener; but before he
could rise to reply, various Rhegine speakers came forward with
comments or questions, which called up the envoys again. A long
time was thus insensibly wasted, Timoleon often trying to get an
opportunity to speak, but being always apparently constrained to
give way to some obtrusive Rhegine. During this long time, however,
his triremes in the harbor were not idle. One by one, with as little
noise as possible, they quitted their anchorage and rowed out to
sea, directing their course towards Sicily. The Carthaginian fleet,
though seeing this proceeding, neither knew what it meant, nor had
any directions to prevent it. At length the other Grecian triremes
were all afloat and in progress; that of Timoleon alone remaining in
the harbor. Intimation being secretly given to him as he sat in the
assembly, he slipped away from the crowd, his friends concealing his
escape—and got aboard immediately. His absence was not
discovered at first, the debate continuing as if he were still present,
and intentionally prolonged by the Rhegine speakers. At length the
truth could no longer be kept back. The envoys and the
Carthaginians found out that the assembly and the debate were
mere stratagems, and that their real enemy had disappeared. But
they found it out too late. Timoleon with his triremes was already on
the voyage to Tauromenium in Sicily, where all arrived safe and
without opposition. Overreached and humiliated, his enemies left the
assembly in vehement wrath against the Rhegines, who reminded
them that Carthaginians ought to be the last to complain of
deception in others.[310]
The well-managed stratagem, whereby Timoleon had overcome a
difficulty to all appearance insurmountable, exalted both his own
fame and the spirits of his soldiers. They were now safe in Sicily, at
Tauromenium, a recent settlement near the site of the ancient
Naxos: receiving hearty welcome from Andromachus, the leading
citizen of the place—whose influence was so mildly exercised, and
gave such complete satisfaction, that it continued through and after
the reform of Timoleon, when the citizens might certainly have
swept it away if they had desired. Andromachus, having been
forward in inviting Timoleon to come, now prepared to coöperate
with him, and returned a spirited reply to the menaces sent over
from Rhegium by the Carthaginians, after they had vainly pursued
the Corinthian squadron to Tauromenium.
But Andromachus and Tauromenium were but petty auxiliaries
compared with the enemies against whom Timoleon had to contend;
enemies now more formidable than ever. For Hiketas, incensed with
the stratagem practised at Rhegium, and apprehensive of
interruption to the blockade which he was carrying on against
Ortygia, sent for an additional squadron of Carthaginian men-of-war
to Syracuse; the harbor of which place was presently completely
beset.[311] A large Carthaginian land force was also acting under
Hanno in the western regions of the island, with considerable
success against the Campanians of Entella and others.[312] The
Sicilian towns had their native despots, Mamerkus at Katana—
Leptines at Apollonia[313]—Nikodemus at Kentoripa—Apolloniades at
Agyrium[314]—from whom Timoleon could expect no aid, except in
so far as they might feel predominant fear of the Carthaginians. And
the Syracusans, even when they heard of his arrival at
Tauromenium, scarcely ventured to indulge hopes of serious relief
from such a handful of men, against the formidable array of Hiketas
and the Carthaginians under their walls. Moreover, what guarantee
had they that Timoleon would turn out better than Dion, Kallippus,
and others before him? seductive promisers of emancipation, who, if
they succeeded, forgot the words by which they had won men’s
hearts, and thought only of appropriating to themselves the sceptre
of the previous despot, perhaps even aggravating all that was bad in
his rule? Such was the question asked by many a suffering citizen of
Syracuse, amidst that despair and sickness of heart which made the
name of an armed liberator sound only like a new deceiver and a
new scourge.[315]
It was by acts alone that Timoleon could refute such well-
grounded suspicions. But at first, no one believed in him; nor could
he escape the baneful effects of that mistrust which his predecessors
had everywhere inspired. The messengers whom he sent round
were so coldly received, that he seemed likely to find no allies
beyond the walls of Tauromenium.
At length one invitation, of great importance, reached him—from
the town of Adranum, about forty miles inland from Tauromenium; a
native Sikel town, seemingly in part hellenized, inconsiderable in
size, but venerated as sacred to the god Adranus, whose worship
was diffused throughout all Sicily. The Adranites being politically
divided, at the same time that one party sent the invitation to
Timoleon, the other despatched a similar message to Hiketas. Either
at Syracuse or Leontini, Hiketas was nearer to Adranum than
Timoleon at Tauromenium; and lost no time in marching thither, with
five thousand troops, to occupy so important a place. He arrived
there in the evening, found no enemy, and established his camp
without the walls, believing himself already master of the place.
Timoleon, with his inferior numbers, knew that he had no chance of
success except in surprise. Accordingly, on setting out from
Tauromenium, he made no great progress the first day, in order that
no report of his approach might reach Adranum; but on the next
morning he marched with the greatest possible effort, taking the
shortest, yet most rugged paths. On arriving within about three
miles of Adranum, he was informed that the troops from Syracuse,
having just finished their march, had encamped near the town, not
aware of any enemy near. His officers were anxious that the men
should be refreshed after their very fatiguing march, before they
ventured to attack an army four times superior in number. But
Timoleon earnestly protested against any such delay, entreating
them to follow him at once against the enemy, as the only chance of
finding them unprepared. To encourage them, he at once took up his
shield and marched at their head, carrying it on his arm (the shield
of the general was habitually carried for him by an orderly), in spite
of the fatiguing march, which he had himself performed on foot as
well as they. The soldiers obeyed, and the effort was crowned by
complete success. The troops of Hiketas, unarmed and at their
suppers, were taken so completely by surprise, that in spite of their
superior number, they fled with scarce any resistance. From the
rapidity of their flight, three hundred of them only were slain, But six
hundred were made prisoners, and the whole camp, including its
appurtenances, was taken, with scarcely the loss of a man. Hiketas
escaped with the rest to Syracuse.[316]
This victory, so rapidly and skilfully won—and the acquisition of
Adranum which followed it—produced the strongest sensation
throughout Sicily. It counted even for more than a victory; it was a
declaration of the gods in favor of Timoleon. The inhabitants of the
holy town, opening their gates and approaching him with awe-
stricken reverence, recounted the visible manifestations of the god
Adranus in his favor. At the moment when the battle was
commencing, they had seen the portals of their temple
spontaneously burst open, and the god brandishing his spear, with
profuse perspiration on his face.[317] Such facts,—verified and
attested in a place of peculiar sanctity, and circulated from thence
throughout the neighboring communities,—contributed hardly less
than the victory to exalt the glory of Timoleon. He received offers of
alliance from Tyndaris and several other towns, as well as from
Mamerkus despot of Katana, one of the most warlike and powerful
princes in the island.[318] So numerous were the reinforcements thus
acquired, and so much was his confidence enhanced by recent
success, that he now ventured to march even under the walls of
Syracuse, and defy Hiketas; who did not think it prudent to hazard a
second engagement with the victor of Adranum.[319]
Hiketas was still master of all Syracuse—except Ortygia, against
which he had constructed lines of blockade, in conjunction with the
Carthaginian fleet occupying the harbor. Timoleon was in no
condition to attack the place, and would have been obliged speedily
to retire, as his enemies did not choose to come out. But it was soon
seen that the manifestations of the Two goddesses, and of the god
Adranus, in his favor, were neither barren nor delusive. A real boon
was now thrown into his lap, such as neither skill nor valor could
have won. Dionysius, blocked up in Ortygia with a scanty supply of
provisions, saw from his walls the approaching army of Timoleon,
and heard of the victory of Adranum. He had already begun to
despair of his own position of Ortygia;[320] where indeed he might
perhaps hold out by bold effort and steady endurance, but without
any reasonable chance of again becoming master of Syracuse; a
chance which Timoleon and the Corinthian intervention cut off more
decidedly than ever. Dionysius was a man not only without the
energetic character and personal ascendency of his father, which
might have made head against such difficulties—but indolent and
drunken in his habits, not relishing a sceptre when it could only be
maintained by hard fighting, nor stubborn enough to stand out to
the last merely as a cause of war.[321] Under these dispositions, the
arrival of Timoleon both suggested to him the idea, and furnished
him with the means, of making his resignation subservient to the
purchase of a safe asylum and comfortable future maintenance: for
to a Grecian despot, with the odium of past severities accumulated
upon his head, abnegation of power was hardly ever possible,
consistent with personal security.[322] But Dionysius felt assured that
he might trust to the guarantee of Timoleon and the Corinthians for
shelter and protection at Corinth, with as much property as he could
carry away with him; since he had the means of purchasing such
guarantee by the surrender of Ortygia—a treasure of inestimable
worth. Accordingly he resolved to propose a capitulation, and sent
envoys to Timoleon for the purpose.
There was little difficulty in arranging terms. Dionysius stipulated
only for a safe transit with his movable property to Corinth, and for
an undisturbed residence in that city; tendering in exchange the
unconditional surrender of Ortygia with all its garrison, arms, and
magazines. The convention was concluded forthwith, and three
Corinthian officers—Telemachus, Eukleides and Neon—were sent in
with four hundred men to take charge of the place. Their entrance
was accomplished safely, though they were obliged to elude the
blockade by stealing in at several times, and in small companies.
Making over to them the possession of Ortygia with the command of
its garrison, Dionysius passed, with some money and a small
number of companions, into the camp of Timoleon; who conveyed
him away, leaving at the same time the neighborhood of Syracuse.
[323]

Conceive the position and feelings of Dionysius, a prisoner in the

camp of Timoleon, traversing that island over which his father as
well as himself had reigned all-powerful, and knowing himself to be
the object of either hatred or contempt to every one,—except so far
as the immense boon which he had conferred, by surrendering
Ortygia, purchased for him an indulgent forbearance! He was
doubtless eager for immediate departure to Corinth, while Timoleon
was no less anxious to send him thither, as the living evidence of
triumph accomplished. Although not fifty days[324] had yet elapsed,
since Timoleon’s landing in Sicily, he was enabled already to
announce a decisive victory, a great confederacy grouped around
him, and the possession of the inexpugnable position of Ortygia,
with a garrison equal in number to his own army; the despatches
being accompanied by the presence of that very despot, bearing the
terrific name of Dionysius, against whom the expedition had been
chiefly aimed! Timoleon sent a special trireme[325] to Corinth,
carrying Dionysius, and communicating important events, together
with the convention which guaranteed to the dethroned ruler an
undisturbed residence in that city.
The impression produced at Corinth by the arrival of this trireme
and its passengers was powerful beyond all parallel. Astonishment
and admiration were universal; for the expedition of Timoleon had
started as a desperate venture, in which scarce one among the
leading Corinthians had been disposed to embark; nor had any man
conceived the possibility of success so rapid as well as so complete.
But the victorious prospect in Sicily, with service under the fortunate
general, was now the general passion of the citizens. A
reinforcement of two thousand hoplites and two hundred cavalry
was immediately voted and equipped.[326]
If the triumph excited wonder and joy, the person of Dionysius
himself appealed no less powerfully to other feelings. A fallen despot
was a sight denied to Grecian eyes; whoever aspired to despotism,
put his all to hazard, forfeiting his chance of retiring to a private
station. By a remarkable concurrence of circumstances, the
exception to this rule was presented just where it was least likely to
take place; in the case of the most formidable and odious despotism
which had ever overridden the Grecian world. For nearly half a
century prior to the expedition of Dion against Syracuse, every one
had been accustomed to pronounce the name of Dionysius with a
mixture of fear and hatred—the sentiment of prostration before
irresistible force. How much difficulty Dion himself found, in
overcoming this impression in the minds of his own soldiers, has
been already related. Though dissipated by the success of Dion, the
antecedent alarm became again revived, when Dionysius recovered
his possession of Ortygia, and when the Syracusans made pathetic
appeal to Corinth for aid against him. Now, on a sudden, the
representative of this extinct greatness, himself bearing the awful
name of Dionysius, enters Corinth under a convention, suing only for
the humble domicile and unpretending security of a private citizen.
[327] The Greek mind was keenly sensitive to such contrasts, which
entered largely into every man’s views of human affairs, and were
reproduced in a thousand forms by writers and speakers. The
affluence of visitors—who crowded to gaze upon and speak to
Dionysius, not merely from Corinth, but from other cities of Greece—
was immense; some in simple curiosity, others with compassion, a
few even with insulting derision. The anecdotes which are recounted
seem intended to convey a degrading impression of this last period
of his career. But even the common offices of life—the purchase of
unguents and condiments at the tavern[328]—the nicety of criticism
displayed respecting robes and furniture[329]—looked degrading
when performed by the ex-despot of Syracuse. His habit of drinking
largely, already contracted, was not likely to become amended in
these days of mortification; yet on the whole his conduct seems to
have had more dignity than could have been expected. His literary
tastes, manifested during the time of his intercourse with Plato, are
implied even in the anecdotes intended to disparage him. Thus he is
said to have opened a school for teaching boys to read, and to have
instructed the public singers in the art of singing or reciting poetry.
[330] His name served to subsequent writers, both Greek and Roman,
—as those of Crœsus, Polykrates, and Xerxes, serve to Herodotus—
for an instance to point a moral on the mutability of human events.
Yet the anecdotes recorded about him can rarely be verified, nor can
we distinguish real matters of fact from those suitable and
impressive myths which so pregnant a situation was sure to bring
forth.
Among those who visited him at Corinth was Aristoxenus of
Tarentum: for the Tarentine leaders, first introduced by Plato, had
maintained their correspondence with Dionysius even after his first
expulsion from Syracuse to Lokri, and had vainly endeavored to
preserve his unfortunate wife and daughters from the retributive
vengeance of the Lokrians. During the palmy days of Dionysius, his
envoy Polyarchus had been sent on a mission to Tarentum, where he
came into conversation with the chief magistrate Archytas. This
conversation Aristoxenus had recorded in writing; probably from the
personal testimony of Archytas, whose biography he composed.
Polyarchus dwelt upon wealth, power, and sensual enjoyments, as
the sole objects worth living for; pronouncing those who possessed
them in large masses, as the only beings deserving admiration. At
the summit of all stood the Persian King, whom Polyarchus extolled
as the most enviable and admirable of mortals. “Next to the Persian
King (said he), though with a very long interval, comes our despot of
Syracuse.”[331] What had become of Polyarchus, we do not know;
but Aristoxenus lived to see the envied Dionysius under the altered
phase of his life at Corinth, and probably to witness the ruin of the
Persian Kings also. On being asked, what had been the cause of his
displeasure against Plato, Dionysius replied, in language widely
differing from that of his former envoy Polyarchus, that amidst the
many evils which surrounded a despot, none was so mischievous as
the unwillingness of his so-called friends to tell him the truth. Such
false friends had poisoned the good feeling between him and Plato.
[332] This anecdote bears greater mark of being genuine, than others
which we read more witty and pungent. The Cynic philosopher
Diogenes treated Dionysius with haughty scorn for submitting to live
in a private station after having enjoyed so overruling an
ascendency. Such was more or less the sentiment of every visitor
who saw him; but the matter to be lamented is, that he had not
been in a private station from the beginning. He was by nature unfit
to tread, even with profit to himself, the perilous and thorny path of
a Grecian despot.
The reinforcements decreed by the Corinthians, though equipped
without delay and forwarded to Thurii in Italy, were prevented from
proceeding farther on shipboard by the Carthaginian squadron at the
strait, and were condemned to wait for a favorable opportunity.[333]
But the greatest of all reinforcements to Timoleon was, the
acquisition of Ortygia. It contained not merely a garrison of two
thousand soldiers—who passed (probably much to their own
satisfaction) from the declining cause of Dionysius to the victorious
banner of Timoleon—but also every species of military stores. There
were horses, engines for siege and battery, missiles of every sort,
and above all, shields and spears to the amazing number of seventy
thousand—if Plutarch’s statement is exact.[334] Having dismissed
Dionysius, Timoleon organized a service of small craft from Katana
to convey provisions by sea to Ortygia, eluding the Carthaginian
guard squadron. He found means to do this with tolerable success,
[335] availing himself of winds or bad weather, when the ships of war
could not obstruct the entrance of the lesser harbor. Meanwhile he
himself returned to Adranum, a post convenient for watching both
Leontini and Syracuse. Here two assassins, bribed by Hiketas, were
on the point of taking his life, while sacrificing at a festival; and were
only prevented by an accident so remarkable, that every one
recognized the visible intervention of the gods to protect him.[336]
Meanwhile Hiketas, being resolved to acquire possession of
Ortygia, invoked the aid of the full Carthaginian force under Magon.
The great harbor of Syracuse was presently occupied by an
overwhelming fleet of one hundred and fifty Carthaginian ships of
war, while a land force, said to consist of sixty thousand men, came
also to join Hiketas, and were quartered by him within the walls of
Syracuse. Never before had any Carthaginian troops got footing
within those walls. Syracusan liberty, perhaps Syracusan Hellenism,
now appeared extinct. Even Ortygia, in spite of the bravery of its
garrison under the Corinthian Neon, seemed not long tenable,
against repeated attack and battery of the walls, combined with
strict blockade to keep out supplies by sea. Still, however, though
the garrison was distressed, some small craft with provisions from
Katana contrived to slip in; a fact, which induced Hiketas and Magon
to form the plan of attacking that town, thinking themselves strong
enough to accomplish this by a part of their force, without
discontinuing the siege of Ortygia. Accordingly they sailed forth from
the harbor, and marched from the city of Syracuse, with the best
part of their armament, to attack Katana, leaving Ortygia still under
blockade. But the commanders left behind were so negligent in their
watch, that Neon soon saw from the walls of Ortygia the opportunity
of attacking them with advantage. Making a sudden and vigorous
sally, he fell upon the blockading army unawares, routed them at all
points with serious loss, and pressed his pursuit so warmly, that he
got possession of Achradina, expelling them from that important
section of the city. The provisions and money, acquired herein at a
critical moment, rendered this victory important. But what gave it
the chief value was, the possession of Achradina which Neon
immediately caused to be joined on to Ortygia by a new line of
fortifications, and thus held the two in combination.[337] Ortygia had
been before (as I have already remarked) completely distinct from
Achradina. It is probable that the population of Achradina, delighted
to be liberated from the Carthaginians, lent zealous aid to Neon both
in the defence of their own walls, and in the construction of the new
connecting lines towards Ortygia; for which the numerous
intervening tombs would supply materials.
This gallant exploit of Neon permanently changed the position of
the combatants at Syracuse. A horseman started instantly to convey
the bad news to Hiketas and Magon near Katana. Both of them
returned forthwith; but they returned only to occupy half of the city
—Tycha, Neapolis, and Epipolæ. It became extremely difficult to
prosecute a successful siege or blockade of Ortygia and Achradina
united: besides that Neon had now obtained abundant supplies for
the moment.
Meanwhile Timoleon too was approaching, reinforced by the new
Corinthian division; who, having been at first detained at Thurii, and
becoming sick of delay, had made their way inland, across the
Bruttian territory, to Rhegium. They were fortunate enough to find
the strait unguarded; for the Carthaginian admiral Hanno—having
seen their ships laid up at Thurii, and not anticipating their advance
by land—had first returned with his squadron to the Strait of
Messina, and next, hoping by a stratagem to frighten the garrison of
Ortygia into surrender, had sailed to the harbor of Syracuse with his
triremes decorated as if after a victory. His seamen with wreaths
round their heads, shouted as they passed into the harbor under the
walls of Ortygia, that the Corinthian squadron approaching the strait
had been all captured, and exhibited as proofs of the victory certain
Grecian shields hung up aboard. By this silly fabrication, Hanno
probably produced a serious dismay among the garrison of Ortygia.
But he purchased such temporary satisfaction at the cost of leaving
the strait unguarded, and allowing the Corinthian division to cross
unopposed from Italy into Sicily. On reaching Rhegium, they not only
found the strait free, but also a complete and sudden calm,
succeeding upon several days of stormy weather. Embarking
immediately on such ferry boats and fishing craft as they could find,
and swimming their horses alongside by the bridle, they reached the
Sicilian coast without loss or difficulty.[338]
Thus did the gods again show their favor towards Timoleon by an
unusual combination of circumstances, and by smiting the enemy
with blindness. So much did the tide of success run along with him,
that the important town of Messênê declared itself among his allies,
admitting the new Corinthian soldiers immediately on their landing.
With little delay, they proceeded forward to join Timoleon; who
thought himself strong enough, notwithstanding that even with this
reinforcement he could only command four thousand men, to march
up to the vicinity of Syracuse, and there to confront the
immeasurably superior force of his enemies.[339] He appears to have
encamped near the Olympieion, and the bridge over the river
Anapus.
Though Timoleon was sure of the coöperation of Neon and the
Corinthian garrison in Ortygia and Achradina, yet he was separated
from them by the numerous force of Hiketas and Magon, who
occupied Epipolæ, Neapolis, and Tycha, together with the low
ground between Epipolæ and the Great Harbor; while the large
Carthaginian fleet filled the Harbor itself. On a reasonable
calculation, Timoleon seemed to have little chance of success. But
suspicion had already begun in the mind of Magon, sowing the
seeds of disunion between him and Hiketas. The alliance between
Carthaginians and Greeks was one unnatural to both parties, and
liable to be crossed, at every mischance, by mutual distrust, growing
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookultra.com