A little later in his narrative than the quote above, Diodorus reiterates, using his other source, that as soon as the Deinomenid tyranny had been abolished the whole of the island made great strides towards an almost idyllic peace (Diod. 11.72.1) Th ere was an abundance of natural produce and domestic animals, slaves tilled the fi elds, profi ts from selling their goods were healthy, and everything that had been squandered on incessant wars was now directed to making the lives of the citizens better than they had ever been. But almost before the inhabitants of Sicily had the chance to enjoy the fruits of peace, they were plunged again into warfare and division, a situation that tells against the notice of a lengthy period of prosperity and peace on the island. Th e text that Diodorus has employed is clearly inaccurate, moralising and dismissive of the achievements of the Deinomenids, which elsewhere, at least as far as Gelon is concerned, are extolled by Diodorus himself (11.67.2-3). Th e sentiment may belong to Ephorus, who as an Athenian writer would have cause to denigrate the memory of tyrants while celebrating the achievements of a democracy, even if these were plainly spurious. As noted above, the expulsion of Th rasybulus was part of a far more complex political event than simply the removal of a tyrant and his replacement by government of the demos. A democratic form of government did not in fact take hold in Syracuse until 461/60. Th en it was immediately involved in a military campaign, which it could only aff ord to undertake with the aid of Sicel allies. In the course of 461, possibly earlier since the narrative is vague, the Syracusans attacked Catane (Aetna); and either while they were besieging the city or shortly beforehand, a local Sicel leader named Ducetius also participated in this assault. But no sooner had these allies won a victory over the mercenaries of Hieron, than they quickly fell out and the history of almost the next decade is one of warfare between the Syracusans and Ducetius.