PASS OVER TAURUS. 21 alarmed at the news that Menon had already crossed the moun- tains by the less frequented pass to his rear, and that the fleet of Cyrus wJ3 sailing along the coast, evacuated his own impregna- ble position, and fell back to Tarsus ; from whence he again re- tired, accompanied by most of the inhabitants, to an inaccessible fastness on the mountains. Accordingly Cyrus, ascending with- out opposition the great pass thus abandoned, reached Tarsus after a march of four days, there rejoining Menon and Epyaxa. Two lochi or companies of the division of Menon, having dis- persed on theu- march for pillage, had been cut off by the natives ; for which the main body of Greeks now took their revenge, plundering both the city and the palace of Syennesis. That prince, though invited by Cyrus to come back to Tarsus, at first refused, but was at length prevailed upon by the persuasions of his wife, to return under a safe conduct. He was induced to contract an alliance, to exchange presents with Cyrus, and to give him a large sum of money towards his expedition, together with a con- tingent of troops ; hi return for which it was stipulated that Kilikia should be no farther plundered, and that the slaves taken away might be recovered wherever they were found. 1 It seems evident, though Xenophon does not directly tell us so, that the resistance of Syennesis, (this was a standing name or title of the hereditary princes of Kilikia under the Persian crown), was a mere feint ; that the visit of Epyaxa with a supply of money to Cyrus, and the admission of Menon and his division over Mount Taurus, were manoeuvres in collusion with him ; and that, thinking Cyrus would be successful, he was disposed to sup- port his cause, yet careful at the same time to give himself the air of having been overpowered, in case Artaxerxes should prove victorious. 2 Alexander the Great, as well as Cyras, was fortunate enough to find this impregnable pass abandoned ; as it appears, through sheer stupidity or reck- lessness of the satrap who ought to have defended it, and who had not even the same excuse for abandoning it as Syennesis had on the approach of Cyrus (Arrian. E. A. ii. 4 ; Curtius, iii, 9, 10, 11). 1 Xen. Anab. i, 2, 23-27. 8 Diodorus (xiv, 20) represents Syennesis as playing a double game, though reluctantly. He takes no notice of the proceeding of Epyaxa. So Livy says, about the conduct of the Macedonian courtiers in regard to the enmity between Perseus and Demetrius, the two sons of Philip II. of
