Syria to a rival who had never conquered him. The account
given by Polysenus, in spite of the improbability of some of
its details, comes from a well-informed author: the defeat
of the Lydians in the second battle explains the retreat of
Crcesus, who is without excuse in Herodotus' version of the
affair. Pompeius Trogus adopted a version similar to that of
Polysenus.

Cyrus employed the respite in attempting to win over the Greek cities
of the littoral, which he pictured to himself as nursing a bitter
hatred against the Mermnadæ; but it is to be doubted if his emissaries
succeeded even in wresting a declaration of neutrality from the
Milesians; the remainder, Ionians and Æolians, all continued faithful
to their oaths.* On the resumption of hostilities, the tide of fortune
turned, and the Lydians were crushed by the superior forces of the
Persians and the Medes; Crcesus retired under cover of night, burning
the country as he retreated, to prevent the enemy from following him,
and crossed the Halys with the remains of his battalions. The season was
already far advanced; he thought that the Persians, threatened in the
rear by the Babylonian troops, would shrink from the prospect of a
winter campaign, and he fell back upon Sardes without further lingering
in Phrygia. But Nabonidus did not feel himself called upon to show the
same devotion that his ally had evinced towards him, or perhaps the
priests who governed in his name did not permit him to fulfil his
engagements.**

* Herodotus makes the attempted corruption of the Ionians to
date from the beginning of the war, even before Cyrus took
the field.