40 HISTORY OF GREECE. into the city, along the hollow way which led to the temple of Herakles, pursued by the light troops, in advance of the rest. Upon these men, however, the Thebans presently turned, repel- ling them with the loss of Eurybotas their commanding officer and seventy men slain. In pursuing these bowmen, the ranks of the Thebans became somewhat disordered, so that they were unable to resist the steady charge of the Macedonian guards and heavy infantry coming up in support. They were broken, and pushed back into the city ; their rout being rendered still more complete by a sally of the Macedonian garrison out of the Kad- meia. The assailants being victorious on this side, the Thebans who were maintaining the combat without the gates were com- pelled to retreat, and the advancing Macedonians forced their way into the town along with them. Within the town, however, the fighting still continued ; the Thebans resisting in organized bodies as long as they could ; and when broken, still resisting even single-handed. None of the military population sued for mercy ; most of them were slain in the streets ; but a few cav- alry and infantry cut their way out into the plain and escaped. The fight now degenerated into a carnage. The Macedonians with their Pasonian contingents were incensed with the obstinate resistance ; while various Greeks serving as auxiliaries — Pho- kians, Orchomenians, Thespians, Platasans, — had to avenge an- cient and grievous injuries endured from Thebes. Such furious feelings were satiated by an indiscriminate massacre of all who came in their way, without distinction of age or sex — old men, women, and childi'en, in houses and even in temples. This king of Egypt, in 306 b. c. ; nor indeed until after the battle of Ipsus in 301, according to Geier(p. 1); at least twentj'-nine years after the sack of Thebes. Moreover, Ptolemy was not ashamed of what Geier calls (p. 11) the "pious fraud" of announcing, that two speaking serpents conducted the army of Alexander to the holy precinct of Zeus Ammon (Arrian, iii. 3). Lastly, it will be found that the depositions which are found in other histo- rians, but not in Ptolemy and Aristobulus, relate principally to matters dis creditable to Alexander. That Ptolemy and Aristobulus omitted, is in my judgment far more probable, than that other historians invented. Admiring biographers would easily excuse themselves for refusing to proclaim to the world such acts as the massacre of the Branchidse, or the dragging of tba wounded Batiz at Gaza.
